From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B151BC4167B for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 21:20:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71A4223B26 for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 21:20:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729535AbgLHVUY (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2020 16:20:24 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47146 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729430AbgLHVUY (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2020 16:20:24 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-x644.google.com (mail-ej1-x644.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::644]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6682C0613CF for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 13:19:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x644.google.com with SMTP id f23so26712993ejk.2 for ; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 13:19:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Uka+2onLr/hF/L1RahMPdiX9WOY0ncZlXCWRJl3wMho=; b=tZJD6H2UJyH1H8uxl2LGiKdQsC37miig9Cs+XOWAaIkElGOQH8KHlyEECZjigfn1Hq NjGmfS76eTMQscsbJf0kM/9lURDMTFapBdRo6EmXg1jPjzxFoXfBDk+VSEdmBV7xrBy5 HKZzFoOEJgYVnHxbksPrqCYe6vzTG68Kxp/Ozqz4J6CYTiTyTGXx7MPeckwsBMh0ZoVB 5XeG/qYUeHIS2F9hheDcae5FlS8No2k19Tl46ZrlYS7VHldJnOaHkbMaStwQqviV+SdB xB8TSRzMsguulFIgL9gKL8fdVIOUqPkUB+/6hGXk3u/ghe5xazeeoNOhFFSlVp7a10uP cuXw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Uka+2onLr/hF/L1RahMPdiX9WOY0ncZlXCWRJl3wMho=; b=lkQ2hi4jnz/4h1wqhQ7oHcPQ0NGlM4B3xTR75HkBzl4hBDsV2Oni2YiuRwoqfpN1oV d/iEglXMClvsl9PgZ4GWh7OeFBEODReDn3SVc4W7EPHEDPBsABBdJnHE3AMPgTIGklmO z1CIi2NhWV+AhNqCsT7vsLdZuSpY+HGiDHYbG6TQ9twxqKHpfw1k+j3FWAS2ysfIRPr0 EjpHZgtWckTm81iarT8HzqVCN3aE2hN4Bk79rYhJsgyUfr5VZ0N6y9Mvi/q5n0WqHCdo wULs0vwg9zO1gUUQPDp3nSXB0BAAbI9CMFjeWe2sQjCBhrmrdQGEvL+AX5mF3SEupUoB 0Ycw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532z//gDixbemKhTL56PnoMtYZWbeNMDCPl0pQ/O1h8UGmIieeTH dIM9sQ7RBOMhY8StoYSKLdo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzqouL6MJZAj0WHsQEsAAutI/cIEX1KtQKWg1qtBSojZwP2QP8JFihSK12g07fJYAB6ubrLGQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:6b88:: with SMTP id l8mr24998162ejr.482.1607462382650; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 13:19:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from skbuf ([188.25.2.120]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w20sm37426edi.12.2020.12.08.13.19.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 08 Dec 2020 13:19:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 23:19:40 +0200 From: Vladimir Oltean To: DENG Qingfang Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, Sean Wang , Landen Chao , Andrew Lunn , Vivien Didelot , Florian Fainelli , "David S . Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Matthias Brugger , Russell King , Frank Wunderlich Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: mt7530: support setting ageing time Message-ID: <20201208211940.ep7lr7bvvuu2wqno@skbuf> References: <20201208070028.3177-1-dqfext@gmail.com> <20201208205621.2xxscilegk4k4t4g@skbuf> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201208205621.2xxscilegk4k4t4g@skbuf> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 10:56:21PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:00:28PM +0800, DENG Qingfang wrote: > > MT7530 has a global address age control register, so use it to set > > ageing time. > > > > The applied timer is (AGE_CNT + 1) * (AGE_UNIT + 1) seconds > > > > Signed-off-by: DENG Qingfang > > --- > > drivers/net/dsa/mt7530.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/net/dsa/mt7530.h | 13 +++++++++++++ > > 2 files changed, 54 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mt7530.c b/drivers/net/dsa/mt7530.c > > index 6408402a44f5..99bf8fed6536 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mt7530.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mt7530.c > > @@ -870,6 +870,46 @@ mt7530_get_sset_count(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, int sset) > > return ARRAY_SIZE(mt7530_mib); > > } > > > > +static int > > +mt7530_set_ageing_time(struct dsa_switch *ds, unsigned int msecs) > > +{ > > + struct mt7530_priv *priv = ds->priv; > > + unsigned int secs = msecs / 1000; > > + unsigned int tmp_age_count; > > + unsigned int error = -1; > > + unsigned int age_count; > > + unsigned int age_unit; > > + > > + /* Applied timer is (AGE_CNT + 1) * (AGE_UNIT + 1) seconds */ > > + if (secs < 1 || secs > (AGE_CNT_MAX + 1) * (AGE_UNIT_MAX + 1)) > > + return -ERANGE; > > + > > + /* iterate through all possible age_count to find the closest pair */ > > + for (tmp_age_count = 0; tmp_age_count <= AGE_CNT_MAX; ++tmp_age_count) { > > + unsigned int tmp_age_unit = secs / (tmp_age_count + 1) - 1; > > + > > + if (tmp_age_unit <= AGE_UNIT_MAX) { > > + unsigned int tmp_error = secs - > > + (tmp_age_count + 1) * (tmp_age_unit + 1); > > + > > + /* found a closer pair */ > > + if (error > tmp_error) { > > + error = tmp_error; > > + age_count = tmp_age_count; > > + age_unit = tmp_age_unit; > > + } > > I feel that the error calculation is just snake oil. This would be enough: > > if (tmp_age_unit <= AGE_UNIT_MAX) > break; > > Explanation: > > You are given a number X, and must find A and B such that the error > E = |(A x B) - X| should be minimum, with > 1 <= A <= A_max > 1 <= B <= B_max > > It is logical to try with A=1 first. If X / A <= B_max, then of course, > B = X / 1, and the error E is 0. > > If that doesn't work out, and B > B_max, then you go to A=2. That gives > you another B = X / 2, and the error E is 1. You check again if B <= > B_max. If it is, that's your answer. B = X / 2, with an error E of 1. > > You get my point. Iterating ascendingly through A, and calculating B as > X / A, already gives you the smallest error as soon as it satisfies the > B <= B_max requirement. > > > + > > + /* found the exact match, so break the loop */ > > + if (!error) > > + break; > > + } > > + } > > + > > + mt7530_write(priv, MT7530_AAC, AGE_CNT(age_count) | AGE_UNIT(age_unit)); > > + > > + return 0; > > +} Thinking more about it, it's not snake oil but is actually correct. Where I was wrong was the division giving you a certain error, but it actually only gives a maximum error. Other, larger, divisors can still give you an error of 0. If the number you're searching for, X, is, say, a multiple of 3 but not of 2, and is: B_max * 1 < X < B_max * 2 then exiting the loop at A=2 would give you an error E=1. But if you continued the loop, then A=3 would have yielded an error E=0, because X is a multiple of 3 but not of 2. I should probably go and refresh my basic arithmetic. Reviewed-by: Vladimir Oltean