Message-ID: <9a789bda-7d98-fa2c-8759-e046c6dd5145@gmx.de>
Date:   Mon, 28 Nov 2016 21:46:31 +0100
From:   Lino Sanfilippo <LinoSanfilippo@....de>
To:     Markus Böhme <markus.boehme@...lbox.org>,
        davem@...emloft.net, charrer@...critech.com, liodot@...il.com,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, andrew@...n.ch
Cc:     devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 1/2] net: ethernet: slicoss: add slicoss
 gigabit ethernet driver

Hi Markus,

On 27.11.2016 18:59, Markus Böhme wrote:
> Hello Lino,
> 
> just some things barely worth mentioning:
> 

> 
> I found a bunch of unused #defines in slic.h. I cannot judge if they are
> worth keeping:
> 
> 	SLIC_VRHSTATB_LONGE
> 	SLIC_VRHSTATB_PREA
> 	SLIC_ISR_IO
> 	SLIC_ISR_PING_MASK
> 	SLIC_GIG_SPEED_MASK
> 	SLIC_GMCR_RESET
> 	SLIC_XCR_RESET
> 	SLIC_XCR_XMTEN
> 	SLIC_XCR_PAUSEEN
> 	SLIC_XCR_LOADRNG
> 	SLIC_REG_DBAR
> 	SLIC_REG_PING
> 	SLIC_REG_DUMP_CMD
> 	SLIC_REG_DUMP_DATA
> 	SLIC_REG_WRHOSTID
> 	SLIC_REG_LOW_POWER
> 	SLIC_REG_RESET_IFACE
> 	SLIC_REG_ADDR_UPPER
> 	SLIC_REG_HBAR64
> 	SLIC_REG_DBAR64
> 	SLIC_REG_CBAR64
> 	SLIC_REG_RBAR64
> 	SLIC_REG_WRVLANID
> 	SLIC_REG_READ_XF_INFO
> 	SLIC_REG_WRITE_XF_INFO
> 	SLIC_REG_TICKS_PER_SEC
> 
> These device IDs are not used, either, but maybe it's good to keep them
> for documentation purposes:
> 
> 	PCI_SUBDEVICE_ID_ALACRITECH_1000X1_2
> 	PCI_SUBDEVICE_ID_ALACRITECH_SES1001T
> 	PCI_SUBDEVICE_ID_ALACRITECH_SEN2002XT
> 	PCI_SUBDEVICE_ID_ALACRITECH_SEN2001XT
> 	PCI_SUBDEVICE_ID_ALACRITECH_SEN2104ET
> 	PCI_SUBDEVICE_ID_ALACRITECH_SEN2102ET
> 

I left these defines in for both documentation and to avoid gaps in
register ranges. I would like to keep this as it is.

>> +
>> +/* SLIC EEPROM structure for Oasis */
>> +struct slic_mojave_eeprom {
> 
> Comment: "for Mojave".

Will fix, thanks,

> 
> [...]
> 
>> +struct slic_device {
>> +	struct pci_dev *pdev;
>> +	struct net_device *netdev;
>> +	void __iomem *regs;
>> +	/* upper address setting lock */
>> +	spinlock_t upper_lock;
>> +	struct slic_shmem shmem;
>> +	struct napi_struct napi;
>> +	struct slic_rx_queue rxq;
>> +	struct slic_tx_queue txq;
>> +	struct slic_stat_queue stq;
>> +	struct slic_stats stats;
>> +	struct slic_upr_list upr_list;
>> +	/* link configuration lock */
>> +	spinlock_t link_lock;
>> +	bool promisc;
>> +	bool autoneg;
>> +	int speed;
>> +	int duplex;
> 
> Maybe make speed and duplex unsigned? They are assigned and compared
> against unsigned values in slicoss.c, so this would get rid of some
> (benign, because of the range of the values) -Wsign-compare warnings in
> slic_configure_link_locked. However, in a comparison there SPEED_UNKNOWN
> would need to be casted to unsigned to prevent another one popping up.
> 

There is indeed a bunch of warnings concerning signedness. Will have a look
at all of them. However I think I will keep "speed" as an int, because casting
SPEED_UNKNOWN to an unsigned int is IMHO an ugly thing to do.

> [...]
> 
>> +#endif /* _SLIC_H */
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/alacritech/slicoss.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/alacritech/slicoss.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..8cd862a
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/alacritech/slicoss.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,1867 @@
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +
>> +static const struct pci_device_id slic_id_tbl[] = {
>> +	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_ALACRITECH,
>> +		     PCI_DEVICE_ID_ALACRITECH_MOAVE) },
> 
> I missed this in slic.h, but is this a typo and "MOAVE" should be
> "MOJAVE"? There are a couple similar #defines in slic.h.

This should definitely be "Mojave". Will fix it. 

> 
> [...]
> 
>> +static void slic_refill_rx_queue(struct slic_device *sdev, gfp_t gfp)
>> +{
>> +	const unsigned int ALIGN_MASK = SLIC_RX_BUFF_ALIGN - 1;
>> +	unsigned int maplen = SLIC_RX_BUFF_SIZE;
>> +	struct slic_rx_queue *rxq = &sdev->rxq;
>> +	struct net_device *dev = sdev->netdev;
>> +	struct slic_rx_buffer *buff;
>> +	struct slic_rx_desc *desc;
>> +	unsigned int misalign;
>> +	unsigned int offset;
>> +	struct sk_buff *skb;
>> +	dma_addr_t paddr;
>> +
>> +	while (slic_get_free_rx_descs(rxq) > SLIC_MAX_REQ_RX_DESCS) {
>> +		skb = alloc_skb(maplen + ALIGN_MASK, gfp);
>> +		if (!skb)
>> +			break;
>> +
>> +		paddr = dma_map_single(&sdev->pdev->dev, skb->data, maplen,
>> +				       DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
>> +		if (dma_mapping_error(&sdev->pdev->dev, paddr)) {
>> +			netdev_err(dev, "mapping rx packet failed\n");
>> +			/* drop skb */
>> +			dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
>> +			break;
>> +		}
>> +		/* ensure head buffer descriptors are 256 byte aligned */
>> +		offset = 0;
>> +		misalign = paddr & ALIGN_MASK;
>> +		if (misalign) {
>> +			offset = SLIC_RX_BUFF_ALIGN - misalign;
>> +			skb_reserve(skb, offset);
>> +		}
>> +		/* the HW expects dma chunks for descriptor + frame data */
>> +		desc = (struct slic_rx_desc *)skb->data;
>> +		memset(desc, 0, sizeof(*desc));
>> +
>> +		buff = &rxq->rxbuffs[rxq->put_idx];
>> +		buff->skb = skb;
>> +		dma_unmap_addr_set(buff, map_addr, paddr);
>> +		dma_unmap_len_set(buff, map_len, maplen);
>> +		buff->addr_offset = offset;
>> +		/* head buffer descriptors are placed immediately before skb */
>> +		slic_write(sdev, SLIC_REG_HBAR, lower_32_bits(paddr) +
>> +						offset);
> 
> This fits nicely on one line. :-)

Right, will fix.

> 
> [...]
> 
>> +static int slic_init_tx_queue(struct slic_device *sdev)
>> +{
>> +	struct slic_tx_queue *txq = &sdev->txq;
>> +	struct slic_tx_buffer *buff;
>> +	struct slic_tx_desc *desc;
>> +	int err;
>> +	int i;
> 
> You could make i unsigned...
> 

>> +
>> +	txq->len = SLIC_NUM_TX_DESCS;
>> +	txq->put_idx = 0;
>> +	txq->done_idx = 0;
>> +
>> +	txq->txbuffs = kcalloc(txq->len, sizeof(*buff), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!txq->txbuffs)
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> +	txq->dma_pool = dma_pool_create("slic_pool", &sdev->pdev->dev,
>> +					sizeof(*desc), SLIC_TX_DESC_ALIGN,
>> +					4096);
>> +	if (!txq->dma_pool) {
>> +		err = -ENOMEM;
>> +		netdev_err(sdev->netdev, "failed to create dma pool\n");
>> +		goto free_buffs;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < txq->len; i++) {
> 
> ...to fix a signed/unsigned comparison warning here, but...
> 
>> +		buff = &txq->txbuffs[i];
>> +		desc = dma_pool_zalloc(txq->dma_pool, GFP_KERNEL,
>> +				       &buff->desc_paddr);
>> +		if (!desc) {
>> +			netdev_err(sdev->netdev,
>> +				   "failed to alloc pool chunk (%i)\n", i);
>> +			err = -ENOMEM;
>> +			goto free_descs;
>> +		}
>> +
>> +		desc->hnd = cpu_to_le32((u32)(i + 1));
>> +		desc->cmd = SLIC_CMD_XMT_REQ;
>> +		desc->flags = 0;
>> +		desc->type = cpu_to_le32(SLIC_CMD_TYPE_DUMB);
>> +		buff->desc = desc;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +
>> +free_descs:
>> +	while (i--) {
> 
> ...this would require reworking this logic to prevent an endless loop,
> so probably not worth bothering, considering that txq->len is well
> within the positive signed range.

AFAICS the logic does not have to be changed. The while loop will also work
fine if "i" is unsigned.

> 
>> +		buff = &txq->txbuffs[i];
>> +		dma_pool_free(txq->dma_pool, buff->desc, buff->desc_paddr);
>> +	}
>> +	dma_pool_destroy(txq->dma_pool);
>> +
>> +free_buffs:
>> +	kfree(txq->txbuffs);
>> +
>> +	return err;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void slic_free_tx_queue(struct slic_device *sdev)
>> +{
>> +	struct slic_tx_queue *txq = &sdev->txq;
>> +	struct slic_tx_buffer *buff;
>> +	int i;
> 
> Make i unsigned? One warning less, almost no work invested.
> 
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < txq->len; i++) {
>> +		buff = &txq->txbuffs[i];
>> +		dma_pool_free(txq->dma_pool, buff->desc, buff->desc_paddr);
>> +		if (!buff->skb)
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		dma_unmap_single(&sdev->pdev->dev,
>> +				 dma_unmap_addr(buff, map_addr),
>> +				 dma_unmap_len(buff, map_len), DMA_TO_DEVICE);
>> +		consume_skb(buff->skb);
>> +	}
>> +	dma_pool_destroy(txq->dma_pool);
>> +
>> +	kfree(txq->txbuffs);
>> +}
>> +
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +static void slic_free_rx_queue(struct slic_device *sdev)
>> +{
>> +	struct slic_rx_queue *rxq = &sdev->rxq;
>> +	struct slic_rx_buffer *buff;
>> +	int i;
> 
> Unsigned?
> 
>> +
>> +	/* free rx buffers */
>> +	for (i = 0; i < rxq->len; i++) {
>> +		buff = &rxq->rxbuffs[i];
>> +
>> +		if (!buff->skb)
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		dma_unmap_single(&sdev->pdev->dev,
>> +				 dma_unmap_addr(buff, map_addr),
>> +				 dma_unmap_len(buff, map_len),
>> +				 DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
>> +		consume_skb(buff->skb);
>> +	}
>> +	kfree(rxq->rxbuffs);
>> +}
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +static int slic_load_firmware(struct slic_device *sdev)
>> +{
>> +	u32 sectstart[SLIC_FIRMWARE_MAX_SECTIONS];
>> +	u32 sectsize[SLIC_FIRMWARE_MAX_SECTIONS];
>> +	const struct firmware *fw;
>> +	unsigned int datalen;
>> +	const char *file;
>> +	int code_start;
>> +	u32 numsects;
>> +	int idx = 0;
>> +	u32 sect;
>> +	u32 instr;
>> +	u32 addr;
>> +	u32 base;
>> +	int err;
>> +	int i;
> 
> Make i unsigned?
> 
>> +
>> +	file = (sdev->model == SLIC_MODEL_OASIS) ?  SLIC_FIRMWARE_OASIS :
>> +						    SLIC_FIRMWARE_MOAVE;
>> +	err = request_firmware(&fw, file, &sdev->pdev->dev);
>> +	if (err) {
>> +		dev_err(&sdev->pdev->dev, "failed to load firmware %s\n", file);
>> +		return err;
>> +	}
>> +	/* Do an initial sanity check concerning firmware size now. A further
>> +	 * check follows below.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (fw->size < SLIC_FIRMWARE_MIN_SIZE) {
>> +		dev_err(&sdev->pdev->dev,
>> +			"invalid firmware size %zu (min is %u)\n", fw->size,
>> +			SLIC_FIRMWARE_MIN_SIZE);
>> +		err = -EINVAL;
>> +		goto release;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	numsects = slic_read_dword_from_firmware(fw, &idx);
>> +	if (numsects == 0 || numsects > SLIC_FIRMWARE_MAX_SECTIONS) {
>> +		dev_err(&sdev->pdev->dev,
>> +			"invalid number of sections in firmware: %u", numsects);
>> +		err = -EINVAL;
>> +		goto release;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	datalen = numsects * 8 + 4;
>> +	for (i = 0; i < numsects; i++) {
>> +		sectsize[i] = slic_read_dword_from_firmware(fw, &idx);
>> +		datalen += sectsize[i];
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	/* do another sanity check against firmware size */
>> +	if (datalen > fw->size) {
>> +		dev_err(&sdev->pdev->dev,
>> +			"invalid firmware size %zu (expected >= %u)\n",
>> +			fw->size, datalen);
>> +		err = -EINVAL;
>> +		goto release;
>> +	}
>> +	/* get sections */
>> +	for (i = 0; i < numsects; i++)
>> +		sectstart[i] = slic_read_dword_from_firmware(fw, &idx);
>> +
>> +	code_start = idx;
>> +	instr = slic_read_dword_from_firmware(fw, &idx);
>> +
>> +	for (sect = 0; sect < numsects; sect++) {
>> +		unsigned int ssize = sectsize[sect] >> 3;
>> +
>> +		base = sectstart[sect];
>> +
>> +		for (addr = 0; addr < ssize; addr++) {
>> +			/* write out instruction address */
>> +			slic_write(sdev, SLIC_REG_WCS, base + addr);
>> +			/* write out instruction to low addr */
>> +			slic_write(sdev, SLIC_REG_WCS, instr);
>> +			instr = slic_read_dword_from_firmware(fw, &idx);
>> +			/* write out instruction to high addr */
>> +			slic_write(sdev, SLIC_REG_WCS, instr);
>> +			instr = slic_read_dword_from_firmware(fw, &idx);
>> +		}
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	idx = code_start;
>> +
>> +	for (sect = 0; sect < numsects; sect++) {
>> +		unsigned int ssize = sectsize[sect] >> 3;
>> +
>> +		instr = slic_read_dword_from_firmware(fw, &idx);
>> +		base = sectstart[sect];
>> +		if (base < 0x8000)
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		for (addr = 0; addr < ssize; addr++) {
>> +			/* write out instruction address */
>> +			slic_write(sdev, SLIC_REG_WCS,
>> +				   SLIC_WCS_COMPARE | (base + addr));
>> +			/* write out instruction to low addr */
>> +			slic_write(sdev, SLIC_REG_WCS, instr);
>> +			instr = slic_read_dword_from_firmware(fw, &idx);
>> +			/* write out instruction to high addr */
>> +			slic_write(sdev, SLIC_REG_WCS, instr);
>> +			instr = slic_read_dword_from_firmware(fw, &idx);
>> +		}
>> +	}
>> +	slic_flush_write(sdev);
>> +	mdelay(10);
>> +	/* everything OK, kick off the card */
>> +	slic_write(sdev, SLIC_REG_WCS, SLIC_WCS_START);
>> +	slic_flush_write(sdev);
>> +	/* wait long enough for ucode to init card and reach the mainloop */
>> +	mdelay(20);
>> +release:
>> +	release_firmware(fw);
>> +
>> +	return err;
>> +}
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +static int slic_init_iface(struct slic_device *sdev)
>> +{
>> +	struct slic_shmem *sm = &sdev->shmem;
>> +	int err;
>> +
>> +	sdev->upr_list.pending = false;
>> +
>> +	err = slic_init_shmem(sdev);
>> +	if (err) {
>> +		netdev_err(sdev->netdev, "failed to load firmware\n");
> 
> Wrong error message.

Yep, will fix.

> 
>> +		return err;
>> +	}
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +static netdev_tx_t slic_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
>> +{
>> +	struct slic_device *sdev = netdev_priv(dev);
>> +	struct slic_tx_queue *txq = &sdev->txq;
>> +	struct slic_tx_buffer *buff;
>> +	struct slic_tx_desc *desc;
>> +	dma_addr_t paddr;
>> +	u32 cbar_val;
>> +	u32 maplen;
>> +
>> +	if (unlikely(slic_get_free_tx_descs(txq) < SLIC_MAX_REQ_TX_DESCS)) {
>> +		netdev_err(dev, "BUG! not enought tx LEs left: %u\n",
> 
> "Enough"?

Will fix.

>> +			   slic_get_free_tx_descs(txq));
>> +		return NETDEV_TX_BUSY;
>> +	}
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +static int slic_read_eeprom(struct slic_device *sdev)
>> +{
>> +	unsigned int devfn = PCI_FUNC(sdev->pdev->devfn);
>> +	struct slic_shmem *sm = &sdev->shmem;
>> +	struct slic_shmem_data *sm_data = sm->shmem_data;
>> +	const unsigned int MAX_LOOPS = 5000;
> 
> Another benign -Wsign-compare warning can be fixed by either dropping
> the unsigned here or making i below unsigned, too.
> 
>> +	unsigned int codesize;
>> +	unsigned char *eeprom;
>> +	struct slic_upr *upr;
>> +	dma_addr_t paddr;
>> +	int err = 0;
>> +	u8 *mac[2];
>> +	int i = 0;
>> +
>> +	eeprom = dma_zalloc_coherent(&sdev->pdev->dev, SLIC_EEPROM_SIZE,
>> +				     &paddr, GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!eeprom)
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> +	slic_write(sdev, SLIC_REG_ICR, SLIC_ICR_INT_OFF);
>> +	/* setup ISP temporarily */
>> +	slic_write(sdev, SLIC_REG_ISP, lower_32_bits(sm->isr_paddr));
>> +
>> +	err = slic_new_upr(sdev, SLIC_UPR_CONFIG, paddr);
>> +	if (!err) {
>> +		for (i = 0; i < MAX_LOOPS; i++) {
>> +			if (le32_to_cpu(sm_data->isr) & SLIC_ISR_UPC)
>> +				break;
>> +			mdelay(1);
>> +		}
>> +		if (i == MAX_LOOPS) {
>> +			dev_err(&sdev->pdev->dev,
>> +				"timed out while waiting for eeprom data\n");
>> +			err = -ETIMEDOUT;
>> +		}
>> +		upr = slic_dequeue_upr(sdev);
>> +		kfree(upr);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	slic_write(sdev, SLIC_REG_ISP, 0);
>> +	slic_write(sdev, SLIC_REG_ISR, 0);
>> +	slic_flush_write(sdev);
>> +
>> +	if (err)
>> +		goto free_eeprom;
>> +
>> +	if (sdev->model == SLIC_MODEL_OASIS) {
>> +		struct slic_oasis_eeprom *oee;
>> +
>> +		oee = (struct slic_oasis_eeprom *)eeprom;
>> +		mac[0] = oee->mac;
>> +		mac[1] = oee->mac2;
>> +		codesize = le16_to_cpu(oee->eeprom_code_size);
>> +	} else {
>> +		struct slic_mojave_eeprom *mee;
>> +
>> +		mee = (struct slic_mojave_eeprom *)eeprom;
>> +		mac[0] = mee->mac;
>> +		mac[1] = mee->mac2;
>> +		codesize = le16_to_cpu(mee->eeprom_code_size);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (!slic_eeprom_valid(eeprom, codesize)) {
>> +		dev_err(&sdev->pdev->dev, "invalid checksum in eeprom\n");
>> +		err = -EINVAL;
>> +		goto free_eeprom;
>> +	}
>> +	/* set mac address */
>> +	ether_addr_copy(sdev->netdev->dev_addr, mac[devfn]);
>> +free_eeprom:
>> +	dma_free_coherent(&sdev->pdev->dev, SLIC_EEPROM_SIZE, eeprom, paddr);
>> +
>> +	return err;
>> +}
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +static int slic_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *ent)
>> +{
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +	err = register_netdev(dev);
>> +	if (err) {
>> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to register net device: %i\n",
>> +			err);
> 
> Could be on one line.

Right, will adjust it.


> Regards,
> Markus
> 

Thanks Markus!

Regards,
Lino

Powered by blists - more mailing lists