Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/3] net: dsa: integrate with SWITCHDEV for HW bridging

[Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>]

On 24/02/15 12:58, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:49:35PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 24/02/15 12:43, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> Hi Florian,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:08:30PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>>> In order to support bridging offloads in DSA switch drivers, select
>>>> NET_SWITCHDEV to get access to the port_stp_update and parent_get_id
>>>> NDOs that we are required to implement.
>>>>
>>>> To facilitate the integratation at the DSA driver level, we implement 3
>>>> types of operations:
>>>>
>>>> - port_join_bridge
>>>> - port_leave_bridge
>>>> - port_stp_update
>>>>
>>>> DSA will resolve which switch ports that are currently bridge port
>>>> members as some Switch hardware/drivers need to know about that to limit
>>>> the register programming to just the relevant registers (especially for
>>>> slow MDIO buses).
>>>>
>>>> We also take care of setting the correct STP state when slave network
>>>> devices are brought up/down while being bridge members.
>>>>
>>>> Finally, when a port is leaving the bridge, we make sure we set in
>>>> BR_STATE_FORWARDING state, otherwise the bridge layer would leave it
>>>> disabled as a result of having left the bridge.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>> [ ... ]
>>>
>>>>  
>>>> +/* Return a bitmask of all ports being currently bridged within a given bridge
>>>> + * device. Note that on leave, the mask will still return the bitmask of ports
>>>> + * currently bridged, prior to port removal, and this is exactly what we want.
>>>> + */
>>>> +static u32 dsa_slave_br_port_mask(struct dsa_switch *ds,
>>>> +				  struct net_device *bridge)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct dsa_slave_priv *p;
>>>> +	unsigned int port;
>>>> +	u32 mask = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	for (port = 0; port < DSA_MAX_PORTS; port++) {
>>>> +		if (!((1 << port) & ds->phys_port_mask))
>>>> +			continue;
>>>> +
>>>> +		p = netdev_priv(ds->ports[port]);
>>>> +
>>>
>>> ds->ports[port] can still be NULL here since the function can be called
>>> before all ports are initialized (which is what I had actually seen).
>>
>> Can it now? I re-ordered the patches such that your change comes first
>> (and I forgot to update the commit message) and by the time we get
>> called from register_netdev(), ds->ports[port] has already been assigned.
>>
>> Am I missing something here?
> 
> Yes, because phys_port_mask is set to include _all_ ports, not just
> the ones already registered.
> 
> Assume ports 0..2 have been registered, phys_port_mask is 0x1f, and
> dsa_slave_br_port_mask is called for a state change on port 0.
> The loop will check ports 3 and 4 which have not yet been registered.

Ok, I re-added the check.

> 
> Strictly speaking we might want to consider adding the same check
> into the suspend and resume functions, at least if suspend  /remove
> can ever happen before the system is fully initialized.

Yes, that is possibly a problem, I don't think I could reproduce that
with my current setup because everything needs to be built into the kernel.
-- 
Florian