[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211218125543.anb7fapwpywwsryx@soft-dev3-1.localhost>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2021 13:55:43 +0100
From: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com" <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
"linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
"vivien.didelot@...il.com" <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
"andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v7 8/9] net: lan966x: Extend switchdev bridge
flags
The 12/17/2021 17:40, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 04:53:52PM +0100, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> > Currently allow a port to be part or not of the multicast flooding mask.
> > By implementing the switchdev calls SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_BRIDGE_FLAGS
> > and SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
> > ---
> > .../microchip/lan966x/lan966x_switchdev.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_switchdev.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_switchdev.c
> > index cef9e690fb82..af227b33cb3f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_switchdev.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_switchdev.c
> > @@ -9,6 +9,34 @@ static struct notifier_block lan966x_netdevice_nb __read_mostly;
> > static struct notifier_block lan966x_switchdev_nb __read_mostly;
> > static struct notifier_block lan966x_switchdev_blocking_nb __read_mostly;
> >
> > +static void lan966x_port_bridge_flags(struct lan966x_port *port,
> > + struct switchdev_brport_flags flags)
> > +{
> > + u32 val = lan_rd(port->lan966x, ANA_PGID(PGID_MC));
> > +
> > + val = ANA_PGID_PGID_GET(val);
>
> Ideally you'd want to read PGID_MC only if you know that BR_MCAST_FLOOD
> is the flag getting changed. Otherwise you'd have to refactor this when
> you add support for more brport flags.
I can see your point. I will refactor this now, such that when new flags
are added this should not be changed.
>
> > +
> > + if (flags.mask & BR_MCAST_FLOOD) {
> > + if (flags.val & BR_MCAST_FLOOD)
> > + val |= BIT(port->chip_port);
> > + else
> > + val &= ~BIT(port->chip_port);
> > + }
> > +
> > + lan_rmw(ANA_PGID_PGID_SET(val),
> > + ANA_PGID_PGID,
> > + port->lan966x, ANA_PGID(PGID_MC));
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int lan966x_port_pre_bridge_flags(struct lan966x_port *port,
> > + struct switchdev_brport_flags flags)
> > +{
> > + if (flags.mask & ~BR_MCAST_FLOOD)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > static void lan966x_update_fwd_mask(struct lan966x *lan966x)
> > {
> > int i;
> > @@ -67,6 +95,12 @@ static int lan966x_port_attr_set(struct net_device *dev, const void *ctx,
> > return 0;
> >
> > switch (attr->id) {
> > + case SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_BRIDGE_FLAGS:
> > + lan966x_port_bridge_flags(port, attr->u.brport_flags);
> > + break;
> > + case SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS:
> > + err = lan966x_port_pre_bridge_flags(port, attr->u.brport_flags);
> > + break;
> > case SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_STP_STATE:
> > lan966x_port_stp_state_set(port, attr->u.stp_state);
> > break;
> > --
> > 2.33.0
> >
--
/Horatiu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists