From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To: Furong Xu <0x1207@gmail.com>
Cc: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>,
Jose Abreu <joabreu@synopsys.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
Joao Pinto <jpinto@synopsys.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk,
linux@armlinux.org.uk, xfr@outlook.com,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v9 3/7] net: stmmac: refactor FPE verification process
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 15:52:58 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240906125258.d7rhhcjdic3quqg2@skbuf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13f5833e52a47895864db726f090f323ec691c62.1725597121.git.0x1207@gmail.com>
On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 12:55:58PM +0800, Furong Xu wrote:
> @@ -5979,44 +5956,29 @@ static int stmmac_set_features(struct net_device *netdev,
> static void stmmac_fpe_event_status(struct stmmac_priv *priv, int status)
> {
> struct stmmac_fpe_cfg *fpe_cfg = &priv->fpe_cfg;
> - enum stmmac_fpe_state *lo_state = &fpe_cfg->lo_fpe_state;
> - enum stmmac_fpe_state *lp_state = &fpe_cfg->lp_fpe_state;
> - bool *hs_enable = &fpe_cfg->hs_enable;
>
> - if (status == FPE_EVENT_UNKNOWN || !*hs_enable)
> - return;
> + /* This is interrupt context, just spin_lock() */
> + spin_lock(&fpe_cfg->lock);
>
> - /* If LP has sent verify mPacket, LP is FPE capable */
> - if ((status & FPE_EVENT_RVER) == FPE_EVENT_RVER) {
> - if (*lp_state < FPE_STATE_CAPABLE)
> - *lp_state = FPE_STATE_CAPABLE;
> + if (!fpe_cfg->pmac_enabled || status == FPE_EVENT_UNKNOWN)
> + goto unlock_out;
>
> - /* If user has requested FPE enable, quickly response */
> - if (*hs_enable)
> - stmmac_fpe_send_mpacket(priv, priv->ioaddr,
> - fpe_cfg,
> - MPACKET_RESPONSE);
> - }
> + /* LP has sent verify mPacket */
> + if ((status & FPE_EVENT_RVER) == FPE_EVENT_RVER)
> + stmmac_fpe_send_mpacket(priv, priv->ioaddr, fpe_cfg,
> + MPACKET_RESPONSE);
>
> - /* If Local has sent verify mPacket, Local is FPE capable */
> - if ((status & FPE_EVENT_TVER) == FPE_EVENT_TVER) {
> - if (*lo_state < FPE_STATE_CAPABLE)
> - *lo_state = FPE_STATE_CAPABLE;
> - }
> + /* Local has sent verify mPacket */
> + if ((status & FPE_EVENT_TVER) == FPE_EVENT_TVER &&
> + fpe_cfg->status != ETHTOOL_MM_VERIFY_STATUS_SUCCEEDED)
> + fpe_cfg->status = ETHTOOL_MM_VERIFY_STATUS_VERIFYING;
>
> - /* If LP has sent response mPacket, LP is entering FPE ON */
> + /* LP has sent response mPacket */
> if ((status & FPE_EVENT_RRSP) == FPE_EVENT_RRSP)
> - *lp_state = FPE_STATE_ENTERING_ON;
> + fpe_cfg->status = ETHTOOL_MM_VERIFY_STATUS_SUCCEEDED;
Nitpick, doesn't affect normal behavior.
If the link partner crafts an unsolicited Response mPacket, and we have
verify_enabled = false, what we should do is we should ignore it.
But what the code does is to transition the state to SUCCEEDED, as if
verify_enabled was true.
We should ignore FPE_EVENT_RRSP events if we are in the
ETHTOOL_MM_VERIFY_STATUS_DISABLED state.
Depending on how the maintainers feel, this could also be handled in a
subsequent patch.
>
> - /* If Local has sent response mPacket, Local is entering FPE ON */
> - if ((status & FPE_EVENT_TRSP) == FPE_EVENT_TRSP)
> - *lo_state = FPE_STATE_ENTERING_ON;
> -
> - if (!test_bit(__FPE_REMOVING, &priv->fpe_task_state) &&
> - !test_and_set_bit(__FPE_TASK_SCHED, &priv->fpe_task_state) &&
> - priv->fpe_wq) {
> - queue_work(priv->fpe_wq, &priv->fpe_task);
> - }
> +unlock_out:
> + spin_unlock(&fpe_cfg->lock);
> }
>
> static void stmmac_common_interrupt(struct stmmac_priv *priv)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-06 12:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-06 4:55 [PATCH net-next v9 0/7] net: stmmac: FPE via ethtool + tc Furong Xu
2024-09-06 4:55 ` [PATCH net-next v9 1/7] net: stmmac: move stmmac_fpe_cfg to stmmac_priv data Furong Xu
2024-09-06 4:55 ` [PATCH net-next v9 2/7] net: stmmac: drop stmmac_fpe_handshake Furong Xu
2024-09-06 4:55 ` [PATCH net-next v9 3/7] net: stmmac: refactor FPE verification process Furong Xu
2024-09-06 12:41 ` Vladimir Oltean
2024-09-06 12:49 ` Vladimir Oltean
2024-09-06 12:52 ` Vladimir Oltean [this message]
2024-09-06 4:55 ` [PATCH net-next v9 4/7] net: stmmac: configure FPE via ethtool-mm Furong Xu
2024-09-06 12:44 ` Vladimir Oltean
2024-09-06 4:56 ` [PATCH net-next v9 5/7] net: stmmac: support fp parameter of tc-mqprio Furong Xu
2024-09-06 4:56 ` [PATCH net-next v9 6/7] net: stmmac: support fp parameter of tc-taprio Furong Xu
2024-09-06 4:56 ` [PATCH net-next v9 7/7] net: stmmac: silence FPE kernel logs Furong Xu
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=20240906125258.d7rhhcjdic3quqg2@skbuf \
--to=olteanv@gmail.com \
--cc=0x1207@gmail.com \
--cc=alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fancer.lancer@gmail.com \
--cc=joabreu@synopsys.com \
--cc=jpinto@synopsys.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=vladimir.oltean@nxp.com \
--cc=xfr@outlook.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