netdev - Re: [PATCH] Revert "macb: support the two tx descriptors on at91rm9200"

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:   Wed, 7 Apr 2021 13:47:37 +0200
From:   Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
To:     Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc:     Daniel Palmer <daniel@...f.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
        Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "macb: support the two tx descriptors on
 at91rm9200"

Hi,

On 07/04/2021 10:42:07+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> 
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 07:04:58PM +0900, Daniel Palmer wrote:
> > Hi Willy,
> > 
> > I've been messing with the SSD202D (sibling of the MSC313E) recently
> > and the ethernet performance was awful.
> > I remembered this revert and reverted it and it makes the ethernet
> > work pretty well.
> 
> OK, that's reassuring, at least they use the same IP blocks.
> 
> > [   15.213358] IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): eth0: link becomes ready
> > [   15.245235] pre0 41001fb8, post0 30001fb0 -> IDLETSR clear
> > [   15.249291] pre1 30001f90, post1 20001d90 -> FIFOIDLE1 clear
> > [   15.253331] pre2 20001d90, post2 10001990 -> FIFOIDLE2 clear
> > [   15.257385] pre3 10001990, post3 00001190 -> FIFOIDLE3 clear
> > [   15.261435] pre4 00001190, post4 f0000191 -> FIFOIDLE4 clear, OVR set
> > [   15.265485] pre5 f0000190, post5 f0000191 -> OVR set
> > [   15.269535] pre6 f0000190, post6 e0000181 -> OVR set, BNQ clear
> > 
> > There seems to be a FIFO empty counter in the top of the register but
> > this is totally undocumented.
> 
> Yes that's extremely visible. I did notice some apparently random
> values at the top of the register as well without being able to
> determine what they were for, because I was pretty much convinced I
> was facing a 2-deep queue only. You had a good idea to force it to
> duplicate packets :-)
> 
> > There are two new status bits TBNQ and FBNQ at bits 7 and 8. I have no
> > idea what they mean.
> 
> Maybe they're related to tx queue empty / tx queue full. Just guessing.
> Since all these bits tend not to be reset until written to, I got confused
> a few times trying to understand what they indicated.
> 
> > Bits 9 through 12 are some new status bits that seem to show if a FIFO
> > slot is inuse.
> 
> Maybe indeed.
> 
> > I can't find any mention of these bits anywhere except the header of
> > the vendor driver so I think these are specific to MStar's macb.
> > The interesting part though is that BNQ does not get cleared until
> > multiple frames have been pushed in and after OVR is set.
> > I think this is what breaks your code when it runs on the MSC313E
> > version of MACB.
> 
> Yes that's very possible, because the behavior was inconsistent with
> what was documented for older chips. Also BNQ changed its meaning on
> more recent chips, so it may very well have yet another one here.
> 
> > Anyhow. I'm working on a version of your patch that should work with
> > both the at91rm9200 and the MSC313E.
> 
> Cool! Thanks for letting me know. If you need me to run some test, let
> me know (just don't expect too short latency these days but I definitely
> will test).
> 

Note that I have my rm9200ek home now and I could also run some tests.
(I do hope it still boots a recent kernel).

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com