From: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
Cc: Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@microchip.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
Arun Ramadoss <arun.ramadoss@microchip.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
kernel@pengutronix.de, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 3/3] net: dsa: microchip: Fix PHY loopback configuration for KSZ8794 and KSZ8873
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2023 10:46:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231220094634.GG1697233@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231207140030.ki625ety6cg3ujxn@skbuf>
On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 04:00:30PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 06:15:02AM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 02:28:23AM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 04:24:26PM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > > > Correct the PHY loopback bit handling in the ksz8_w_phy_bmcr and
> > > > ksz8_r_phy_bmcr functions for KSZ8794 and KSZ8873 variants in the ksz8795
> > > > driver. Previously, the code erroneously used Bit 7 of port register 0xD
> > > > for both chip variants, which is actually for LED configuration. This
> > > > update ensures the correct registers and bits are used for the PHY
> > > > loopback feature:
> > > >
> > > > - For KSZ8794: Use 0xF / Bit 7.
> > > > - For KSZ8873: Use 0xD / Bit 0.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
> > > > ---
> > >
> > > How did you find, and how did you test this, and on which one of the switches?
> >
> > I tested it by using "ethtool -t lanX" command on KSZ8873. Before this
> > patch the link will stop to work _after_ end of the selftest. The
> > selftest will fail too.
> >
> > After this patch, the selftest is passed, except of the TCP test. And
> > link is working _after_ the selftest,
>
> So you are suggesting that this far-end loopback mode does work as
> expected by the kernel.
>
> But is that consistent with the description from the datasheet? It speaks
> about an "originating PHY port", but maybe this is confusing, because
> based on your test, even the CPU port could be originating the traffic
> that gets looped back?
>
> I see it says that far-end loopback goes through the switching fabric.
> So the packet, on its return path from the loopback port, gets forwarded
> by its MAC DA? That can't be, because the MAC DA lookup has already
> determined the destination to be the loopback port (and no MAC SA<->DA
> swapping should take place). Or it is forced by the switch to return
> specifically to the originating port?
>
> With a bridge between the 2 LAN ports, and lan1 put in loopback, what
> happens if you send a broadcast packet towards lan1? Will you also see
> it on lan2's link partner, or only on the CPU port?
>
> It's not your fault, but this is all a bit confusing, and I'm not quite
> able to match up the documentation with your results. I will trust the
> experimental results, however.
I did following tests:
ip l a name br0 type bridge
ip l s dev br0 up
ip l s lan1 master br0
ip l s dev lan1 up
ip l s lan2 master br0
ip l s dev lan2 up
# to avoid link drop with the loopback mode
ethtool -s lan1 speed 100 duplex full autoneg off
# currently no tool support loopback configuration, so set it directly
# to the register
mii -i lan1 -p 0 -r 0 -v 6120
################# Test 1 ###########################
# on DUT
ping 192.168.2.200 -I lan1
on eth0/cpu interface:
00:03:20.656445 AF Unknown (4294967295), length 61:
0x0000: ffff 000e cd00 cdbe 0806 0001 0800 0604 ................
0x0010: 0001 000e cd00 cdbe c0a8 010e 0000 0000 ................
0x0020: 0000 c0a8 02c8 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 ................
0x0030: 0000 0000 0000 0000 01 .........
00:03:20.656548 AF Unknown (4294967295), length 61:
0x0000: ffff 000e cd00 cdbe 0806 0001 0800 0604 ................
0x0010: 0001 000e cd00 cdbe c0a8 010e 0000 0000 ................
0x0020: 0000 c0a8 02c8 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 ................
0x0030: 0000 0000 0000 0000 00 .........
on lan1 remote system:
100 701.752654927 00:0e:cd:00:cd:be → ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff ARP 60 Who has 192.168.2.200? Tell 192.168.1.14
on lan2 remote system:
347 1071.154437549 00:0e:cd:00:cd:be → ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff ARP 60 Who has 192.168.2.200? Tell 192.168.1.14
################# Test 2 ###########################
# send ping on on lan1 remote system:
ping 172.17.0.1
on eth0/cpu interface DUT:
-- nothing --
on lan1 remote system:
109 946.617862621 80:61:5f:0c:29:54 → ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff ARP 42 Who has 172.17.0.1? Tell 172.17.0.12
on lan2 remote system:
-- nothing --
################# Test 3 ###########################
# send ping on on lan2 remote system:
ping 172.17.0.122
on eth0/cpu interface DUT:
00:12:18.034220 AF Unknown (4294967295), length 61:
0x0000: ffff 8061 5f0c 2955 0806 0001 0800 0604 ...a_.)U........
0x0010: 0001 8061 5f0c 2955 ac11 000d 0000 0000 ...a_.)U........
0x0020: 0000 ac11 007a 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 .....z..........
0x0030: 0000 0000 0000 0000 01 .........
00:12:18.034228 AF Unknown (4294967295), length 61:
0x0000: ffff 8061 5f0c 2955 0806 0001 0800 0604 ...a_.)U........
0x0010: 0001 8061 5f0c 2955 ac11 000d 0000 0000 ...a_.)U........
0x0020: 0000 ac11 007a 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 .....z..........
0x0030: 0000 0000 0000 0000 00
on lan1 remote system:
-- nothing --
on lan2 remote system:
476 1608.560311470 80:61:5f:0c:29:55 → ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff ARP 42 Who has 172.17.0.122? Tell 172.17.0.13
477 1608.560361808 80:61:5f:0c:29:55 → ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff ARP 60 Who has 172.17.0.122? Tell 172.17.0.13
I also retest selftest results and noted that it is not working if
port is part of bridge.
Regards,
Oleksij
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-20 9:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-21 15:24 [PATCH net-next v1 1/3] net: dsa: microchip: ksz8: move BMCR specific code to separate function Oleksij Rempel
2023-11-21 15:24 ` [PATCH net-next v1 2/3] net: dsa: microchip: Remove redundant optimization in ksz8_w_phy_bmcr Oleksij Rempel
2023-11-23 10:54 ` Paolo Abeni
2023-12-06 22:37 ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-11-21 15:24 ` [PATCH net-next v1 3/3] net: dsa: microchip: Fix PHY loopback configuration for KSZ8794 and KSZ8873 Oleksij Rempel
2023-11-23 10:52 ` Paolo Abeni
2023-12-06 8:55 ` Oleksij Rempel
2023-12-06 15:14 ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-12-06 15:54 ` Oleksij Rempel
2023-12-06 16:43 ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-12-07 0:28 ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-12-07 5:15 ` Oleksij Rempel
2023-12-07 14:00 ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-12-20 9:46 ` Oleksij Rempel [this message]
2023-12-06 16:46 ` [PATCH net-next v1 1/3] net: dsa: microchip: ksz8: move BMCR specific code to separate function Vladimir Oltean
2023-12-07 4:57 ` Arun.Ramadoss
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20231220094634.GG1697233@pengutronix.de \
--to=o.rempel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=arun.ramadoss@microchip.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olteanv@gmail.com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=woojung.huh@microchip.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).