linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3 net-next 12/13] net: enetc: add preliminary support for i.MX95 ENETC PF

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID:
 <PAXPR04MB8510A1664D3CFAACD71872AB88402@PAXPR04MB8510.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2024 03:05:52 +0000
From: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>
To: Frank Li <frank.li@....com>
CC: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>, "edumazet@...gle.com"
	<edumazet@...gle.com>, "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
	"pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>, "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>,
	"krzk+dt@...nel.org" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, "conor+dt@...nel.org"
	<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>, Claudiu
 Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>, Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>,
	"christophe.leroy@...roup.eu" <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
	"linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>, "bhelgaas@...gle.com"
	<bhelgaas@...gle.com>, "horms@...nel.org" <horms@...nel.org>,
	"imx@...ts.linux.dev" <imx@...ts.linux.dev>, "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>, "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 net-next 12/13] net: enetc: add preliminary support for
 i.MX95 ENETC PF

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wei Fang
> Sent: 2024年10月18日 10:04
> To: Frank Li <frank.li@....com>
> Cc: davem@...emloft.net; edumazet@...gle.com; kuba@...nel.org;
> pabeni@...hat.com; robh@...nel.org; krzk+dt@...nel.org;
> conor+dt@...nel.org; Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>; Claudiu
> Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>; Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>;
> christophe.leroy@...roup.eu; linux@...linux.org.uk; bhelgaas@...gle.com;
> horms@...nel.org; imx@...ts.linux.dev; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
> devicetree@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 net-next 12/13] net: enetc: add preliminary support for
> i.MX95 ENETC PF
> 
> [...]
> > > @@ -1721,14 +1724,25 @@ void enetc_get_si_caps(struct enetc_si *si)
> > >  	struct enetc_hw *hw = &si->hw;
> > >  	u32 val;
> > >
> > > +	if (is_enetc_rev1(si))
> > > +		si->clk_freq = ENETC_CLK;
> > > +	else
> > > +		si->clk_freq = ENETC_CLK_333M;
> >
> > can you use clk_gate_rate() to get frequency instead of hardcode here.
> 
> clk_gate_rate() is not possible to be used here, enetc_get_si_caps() is shared
> by PF and VFs, but VF does not have DT node. Second, LS1028A and S32
> platform do not use the clocks property.
> 
> > Or you should use standard PCIe version information.
> >
> 
> What do you mean standard PCIe version? is_enetc_rev1() gets the revision
> from struct pci_dev:: revision, my understanding is that this is the revision
> provided by PCIe.
> 
> [...]
> > > +
> > > @@ -593,6 +620,9 @@ static int enetc_get_rxnfc(struct net_device *ndev,
> > struct ethtool_rxnfc *rxnfc,
> > >  	struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
> > >  	int i, j;
> > >
> > > +	if (is_enetc_rev4(priv->si))
> > > +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > > +
> > >  	switch (rxnfc->cmd) {
> > >  	case ETHTOOL_GRXRINGS:
> > >  		rxnfc->data = priv->num_rx_rings;
> > > @@ -643,6 +673,9 @@ static int enetc_set_rxnfc(struct net_device *ndev,
> > struct ethtool_rxnfc *rxnfc)
> > >  	struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
> > >  	int err;
> > >
> > > +	if (is_enetc_rev4(priv->si))
> > > +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > > +
> > >  	switch (rxnfc->cmd) {
> > >  	case ETHTOOL_SRXCLSRLINS:
> > >  		if (rxnfc->fs.location >= priv->si->num_fs_entries) @@ -678,6
> > > +711,9 @@ static u32 enetc_get_rxfh_key_size(struct net_device *ndev)
> > > {
> > >  	struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
> > >
> > > @@ -843,8 +890,12 @@ static int enetc_set_coalesce(struct net_device
> > > *ndev,  static int enetc_get_ts_info(struct net_device *ndev,
> > >  			     struct kernel_ethtool_ts_info *info)  {
> > > +	struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
> > >  	int *phc_idx;
> > >
> > > +	if (is_enetc_rev4(priv->si))
> > > +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > > +
> >
> > Can you just not set enetc_pf_ethtool_ops if it is imx95 instead of check each
> > ethtools function? or use difference enetc_pf_ethtool_ops for imx95?
> >
> 
> For the first question, in the current patch, i.MX95 already supports some
> ethtool interfaces, so there is no need to remove them.
> 
> For the second question, for LS1028A and i.MX95, the logic of these ethtool
> interfaces is basically the same, the difference is the hardware operation part.
> It's just that support for i.MX95 has not yet been added. Both the current
> approach and the approach you suggested will eventually merge into using the
> same enetc_pf_ethtool_ops, so I don't think there is much practical point in
> switching to the approach you mentioned.

I thought about it again, your suggestion is more reasonable and easier to
understand. I will merge the two enetc_pf_ethtool_ops into one after I
complete the support of all ethtool interfaces of i.MX95. Thanks.