From: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
Bin Meng <bin.meng@windriver.com>, Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>,
QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
qemu-ppc <qemu-ppc@nongnu.org>, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] hw/net: fsl_etsec: Reverse the RCTRL.RSF logic
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:11:51 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210210001151.GC4450@yekko.fritz.box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA-yPsHpq+q7osCKTGGJ7LiHdMWFxuxJN9Gyey5dJvjWcw@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3379 bytes --]
On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 09:48:18AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 at 01:22, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Bin Meng <bin.meng@windriver.com>
> >
> > Per MPC8548ERM [1] chapter 14.5.3.4.1:
> >
> > When RCTRL.RSF is 1, frames less than 64 bytes are accepted upon
> > a DA match. But currently QEMU does the opposite.
> >
> > When RCTRL.RSF is 0, short frames are silently dropped, however
> > we cannot drop such frames in QEMU as of today, due to both slirp
> > and tap networking do not pad short frames (e.g.: an ARP packet)
> > to the minimum frame size of 60 bytes.
> >
> > If eTSEC is programmed to reject short frames, ARP requests will be
> > dropped, preventing the guest from becoming visible on the network.
> >
> > The same issue was reported on e1000 and vmxenet3 before, see:
> >
> > commit 78aeb23eded2 ("e1000: Pad short frames to minimum size (60 bytes)")
> > commit 40a87c6c9b11 ("vmxnet3: Pad short frames to minimum size (60 bytes)")
> >
> > Ideally this should be fixed on the slirp/tap networking side to
> > pad short frames to the minimum frame length, but I am not sure
> > whether that's doable.
> >
> > This commit reverses the RCTRL.RSF testing logic to match the spec.
> > The log message is updated to mention the reject short frames
> > functionality is unimplemented.
> >
> > [1] https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/reference-manual/MPC8548ERM.pdf
> >
> > Fixes: eb1e7c3e5146 ("Add Enhanced Three-Speed Ethernet Controller (eTSEC)")
> > Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bin.meng@windriver.com>
>
>
> > - if ((etsec->regs[RCTRL].value & RCTRL_RSF) && (size < 60)) {
> > + /*
> > + * Both slirp and tap networking do not pad short frames
> > + * (e.g.: an ARP packet) to the minimum frame size of 60 bytes.
> > + *
> > + * If eTSEC is programmed to reject short frames, ARP requests
> > + * will be dropped, preventing the guest from becoming visible
> > + * on the network.
> > + */
> > + if (!(etsec->regs[RCTRL].value & RCTRL_RSF) && (size < 60)) {
> > /* CRC is not in the packet yet, so short frame is below 60 bytes */
> > - RING_DEBUG("%s: Drop short frame\n", __func__);
> > - return -1;
> > + RING_DEBUG("%s: Drop short frame not implemented\n", __func__);
> > }
>
> This change is doing two things at once.
Oops, I missed that.
> One of them is an entirely uncontroversial bug fix: we
> got the sense of the RCTRL_RSF test the wrong way round.
>
> The other is different: it is working around a bug elsewhere in QEMU.
>
> If there's a problem with packets that should not be short
> frames being presented to ethernet devices as short frames,
> please fix that bug at the source. I don't think we should
> take any more device-model workarounds for it. We have lots
> and lots of ethernet device models: it will be much more
> effort to try to fix them all one by one as people encounter
> this bug than it would be to just fix the code that's creating
> bogus short frames.
>
> David, could you drop this from your queue, please ?
Done.
>
> thanks
> -- PMM
>
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-10 1:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-09 1:22 [PATCH v2] hw/net: fsl_etsec: Reverse the RCTRL.RSF logic Bin Meng
2021-02-09 2:02 ` David Gibson
2021-02-09 9:48 ` Peter Maydell
2021-02-09 9:54 ` Bin Meng
2021-02-10 0:11 ` David Gibson [this message]
2021-02-10 1:37 ` Bin Meng
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=20210210001151.GC4450@yekko.fritz.box \
--to=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=bin.meng@windriver.com \
--cc=bmeng.cn@gmail.com \
--cc=groug@kaod.org \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-ppc@nongnu.org \
/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).