[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZumSKSI6vMfR61wP@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 15:28:57 +0100
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Tarun Alle <tarun.alle@...rochip.com>
Cc: arun.ramadoss@...rochip.com, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
andrew@...n.ch, hkallweit1@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V4] net: phy: microchip_t1: SQI support for
LAN887x
On Tue, Sep 17, 2024 at 05:26:57PM +0530, Tarun Alle wrote:
> From: Tarun Alle <Tarun.Alle@...rochip.com>
>
> Add support for measuring Signal Quality Index for LAN887x T1 PHY.
> Signal Quality Index (SQI) is measure of Link Channel Quality from
> 0 to 7, with 7 as the best. By default, a link loss event shall
> indicate an SQI of 0.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tarun Alle <Tarun.Alle@...rochip.com>
Please note that the merge window is open, which means that net-next is
currently closed. Thus, patches should be submitted as RFC.
> ---
> v3 -> v4
> - Added check to handle invalid samples.
> - Added macro for ARRAY_SIZE(rawtable).
>
> v2 -> v3
> - Replaced hard-coded values with ARRAY_SIZE(rawtable).
>
> v1 -> v2
> - Replaced hard-coded 200 with ARRAY_SIZE(rawtable).
Hmm. We've been through several iterations trying to clean this up
into something more easily readable, but I fear there'll be another
iteration.
Maybe the following would be nicer:
enum {
SQI_SAMPLES = 200,
/* Look at samples of the middle 60% */
SQI_INLIERS_NUM = SQI_SAMPLES * 60 / 100,
SQI_INLIERS_START = (SQI_SAMPLES - SQI_INLIERS_NUM) / 2,
SQI_INLIERS_END = SQI_INLIERS_START + SQI_INLIERS_NUM,
};
> +static int lan887x_get_sqi_100M(struct phy_device *phydev)
> +{
> + u16 rawtable[200];
u16 rawtable[SQI_SAMPLES];
> + u32 sqiavg = 0;
> + u8 sqinum = 0;
> + int rc;
Since you use "i" multiple times, declare it at the beginning of the
function rather than in each for loop.
int i;
> +
> + /* Configuration of SQI 100M */
> + rc = phy_write_mmd(phydev, MDIO_MMD_VEND1,
> + LAN887X_COEFF_PWR_DN_CONFIG_100,
> + LAN887X_COEFF_PWR_DN_CONFIG_100_V);
> + if (rc < 0)
> + return rc;
> +
> + rc = phy_write_mmd(phydev, MDIO_MMD_VEND1, LAN887X_SQI_CONFIG_100,
> + LAN887X_SQI_CONFIG_100_V);
> + if (rc < 0)
> + return rc;
> +
> + rc = phy_read_mmd(phydev, MDIO_MMD_VEND1, LAN887X_SQI_CONFIG_100);
> + if (rc != LAN887X_SQI_CONFIG_100_V)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + rc = phy_modify_mmd(phydev, MDIO_MMD_VEND1, LAN887X_POKE_PEEK_100,
> + LAN887X_POKE_PEEK_100_EN,
> + LAN887X_POKE_PEEK_100_EN);
> + if (rc < 0)
> + return rc;
> +
> + /* Required before reading register
> + * otherwise it will return high value
> + */
> + msleep(50);
> +
> + /* Link check before raw readings */
> + rc = genphy_c45_read_link(phydev);
> + if (rc < 0)
> + return rc;
> +
> + if (!phydev->link)
> + return -ENETDOWN;
> +
> + /* Get 200 SQI raw readings */
> + for (int i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(rawtable); i++) {
for (i = 0; i < SQI_SAMPLES; i++) {
> + rc = phy_write_mmd(phydev, MDIO_MMD_VEND1,
> + LAN887X_POKE_PEEK_100,
> + LAN887X_POKE_PEEK_100_EN);
> + if (rc < 0)
> + return rc;
> +
> + rc = phy_read_mmd(phydev, MDIO_MMD_VEND1,
> + LAN887X_SQI_MSE_100);
> + if (rc < 0)
> + return rc;
> +
> + rawtable[i] = (u16)rc;
> + }
> +
> + /* Link check after raw readings */
> + rc = genphy_c45_read_link(phydev);
> + if (rc < 0)
> + return rc;
> +
> + if (!phydev->link)
> + return -ENETDOWN;
> +
> + /* Sort SQI raw readings in ascending order */
> + sort(rawtable, ARRAY_SIZE(rawtable), sizeof(u16), data_compare, NULL);
sort(rawtable, SQI_SAMPLES, sizeof(u16), data_compare, NULL);
Although renaming data_compare to sqi_compare would be even more
descriptive of what it's doing.
> +
> + /* Keep inliers and discard outliers */
> + for (int i = SQI100M_SAMPLE_INIT(5, rawtable);
> + i < SQI100M_SAMPLE_INIT(5, rawtable) * 4; i++)
for (i = SQI_INLIERS_START; i < SQI_INLIERS_END; i++)
> + sqiavg += rawtable[i];
> +
> + /* Handle invalid samples */
> + if (sqiavg != 0) {
> + /* Get SQI average */
> + sqiavg /= SQI100M_SAMPLE_INIT(5, rawtable) * 4 -
> + SQI100M_SAMPLE_INIT(5, rawtable);
sqiavg /= SQI_INLIERS_NUM;
Overall, I think this is better rather than the SQI100M_SAMPLE_INIT()
macro... for which I'm not sure what the _INIT() bit actually means.
I think my suggestion has the advantage that it makes it clear what
these various calculations are doing, because the result of the
calculations is described in the enum name.
Thanks.
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists