netdev - Re: [PATCH/RFC v5 net-next] ravb: Add dma queue interrupt support

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]
Date:	Thu, 3 Mar 2016 03:32:57 +0900
From:	Yoshihiro Kaneko <ykaneko0929@...il.com>
To:	Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux-sh list <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v5 net-next] ravb: Add dma queue interrupt support

2016-03-01 5:55 GMT+09:00 Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>:
> On 02/28/2016 05:13 PM, Yoshihiro Kaneko wrote:
>
>>>> From: Kazuya Mizuguchi <kazuya.mizuguchi.ks@...esas.com>
>>>>
>>>> This patch supports the following interrupts.
>>>>
>>>> - One interrupt for multiple (error, gPTP)
>>>> - One interrupt for emac
>>>> - Four interrupts for dma queue (best effort rx/tx, network control
>>>> rx/tx)
>>>>
>>>> This patch improve efficiency of the interrupt handler by adding the
>>>> interrupt handler corresponding to each interrupt source described
>>>> above. Additionally, it reduces the number of times of the access to
>>>> EthernetAVB IF.
>>>> Also this patch prevent this driver depends on the whim of a boot
>>>> loader.
>>>>
>>>> [ykaneko0929@...il.com: define bit names of registers]
>>>> [ykaneko0929@...il.com: add comment for gen3 only registers]
>>>> [ykaneko0929@...il.com: fix coding style]
>>>> [ykaneko0929@...il.com: update changelog]
>>>> [ykaneko0929@...il.com: gen3: fix initialization of interrupts]
>>>> [ykaneko0929@...il.com: gen3: fix clearing interrupts]
>>>> [ykaneko0929@...il.com: gen3: add helper function for request_irq()]
>>>> [ykaneko0929@...il.com: revert ravb_close() and ravb_ptp_stop()]
>>>> [ykaneko0929@...il.com: avoid calling free_irq() to non-hooked
>>>> interrupts]
>>>> [ykaneko0929@...il.com: make NC/BE interrupt handler a function]
>>>> Signed-off-by: Kazuya Mizuguchi <kazuya.mizuguchi.ks@...esas.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yoshihiro Kaneko <ykaneko0929@...il.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>>>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>>>> index c936682..1bec71e 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>>>
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> @@ -697,6 +726,39 @@ static void ravb_error_interrupt(struct net_device
>>>> *ndev)
>>>>          }
>>>>    }
>>>>
>>>> +static int ravb_nc_be_interrupt(struct net_device *ndev, int
>>>> ravb_queue,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     I'd call this function e.g. ravb_queue_interrupt(). And make it
>>> return
>>> 'bool' or even 'irqreturn_t' directly. And I'd suggest a shorter name for
>>> the 'ravb_queue' parameter, like 'queue' or even 'q'...
>>
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>>>
>>>> +                               u32 ris0, u32 *ric0, u32 tis, u32 *tic)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     You don't seem to need 'ric0' and 'tic' past the call sites, so no
>>> real
>>> need to pass them by reference.
>>
>>
>> When Rx/Tx interrupt for NC and BE is issued at the same time,
>> this function is called twice (for NC, BE) from ravb_interrupt.
>> The interrupt mask of NC set in the first call will be reset in the next
>> call for BE. So it is necessary to keep the modified value of "ric0" and
>> "tic".
>
>
>    OK, but we still can simplify this by reading these registers right in
> ravb_queue_interrupt()...

OK.

>
>
> [...]
>>>>
>>>> @@ -725,31 +787,15 @@ static irqreturn_t ravb_interrupt(int irq, void
>>>> *dev_id)
>>>>
>>>>                  /* Network control and best effort queue RX/TX */
>>>>                  for (q = RAVB_NC; q >= RAVB_BE; q--) {
>>>> -                       if (((ris0 & ric0) & BIT(q)) ||
>>>> -                           ((tis  & tic)  & BIT(q))) {
>>>> -                               if (napi_schedule_prep(&priv->napi[q]))
>>>> {
>>>> -                                       /* Mask RX and TX interrupts */
>>>> -                                       ric0 &= ~BIT(q);
>>>> -                                       tic &= ~BIT(q);
>>>> -                                       ravb_write(ndev, ric0, RIC0);
>>>> -                                       ravb_write(ndev, tic, TIC);
>>>> -                                       __napi_schedule(&priv->napi[q]);
>>>> -                               } else {
>>>> -                                       netdev_warn(ndev,
>>>> -                                                   "ignoring interrupt,
>>>> rx status 0x%08x, rx mask 0x%08x,\n",
>>>> -                                                   ris0, ric0);
>>>> -                                       netdev_warn(ndev,
>>>> -                                                   "
>>>> tx status 0x%08x, tx mask 0x%08x.\n",
>>>> -                                                   tis, tic);
>>>> -                               }
>>>> +                       if (ravb_nc_be_interrupt(ndev, q, ris0, &ric0,
>>>> tis,
>>>> +                                                &tic))
>>>>                                  result = IRQ_HANDLED;
>>>> -                       }
>>>>                  }
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     Unroll this *for* loop please...
>
>
>> OK.
>
>
>    It was a bad idea actually, sorry...

OK, I will revert this part.
(But I think it is not that bad...)

>
> [...]
>>>>
>>>> @@ -767,6 +813,73 @@ static irqreturn_t ravb_interrupt(int irq, void
>
> [...]
>>>>
>>>> +static irqreturn_t ravb_dmaq_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id, int
>>>> ravb_queue)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     Perhaps, ravb_rx_tx_interrupt()?
>>
>>
>> Agreed.
>
>
>    And we still have ravb_dma_interrupt() unused, right?

Do you mean that there is an unused "ravb_dma_interrupt()" in this version?
I probably be misunderstanding something.

>
> [...]
>
>> Thanks,
>> kaneko
>
>
> MBR, Sergei
>

Thanks,
kaneko