netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 04/13] ravb: Add ptp_cfg_active to struct ravb_hw

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: <78ff279d-03f1-6932-88d8-1eac83d087ec@omp.ru>
Date:   Thu, 26 Aug 2021 13:29:52 +0300
From:   Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@....ru>
To:     Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     Prabhakar Mahadev Lad <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>,
        "Andrew Lunn" <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...il.com>,
        "Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>,
        Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Chris Paterson <Chris.Paterson2@...esas.com>,
        Biju Das <biju.das@...renesas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 04/13] ravb: Add ptp_cfg_active to struct
 ravb_hw_info

On 26.08.2021 9:20, Biju Das wrote:

[...]
>>> There are some H/W differences for the gPTP feature between R-Car
>>> Gen3, R-Car Gen2, and RZ/G2L as below.
>>>
>>> 1) On R-Car Gen3, gPTP support is active in config mode.
>>> 2) On R-Car Gen2, gPTP support is not active in config mode.
>>> 3) RZ/G2L does not support the gPTP feature.
>>>
>>> Add a ptp_cfg_active hw feature bit to struct ravb_hw_info for
>>> supporting gPTP active in config mode for R-Car Gen3.
>>
>>     Wait, we've just done this ion the previous patch!
>>
>>> This patch also removes enum ravb_chip_id, chip_id from both struct
>>> ravb_hw_info and struct ravb_private, as it is unused.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h      |  8 +-------
>>>   drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c | 12 +++++-------
>>>   2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
>>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
>>> index 9ecf1a8c3ca8..209e030935aa 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h
>>> @@ -979,17 +979,11 @@ struct ravb_ptp {
>>>   	struct ravb_ptp_perout perout[N_PER_OUT];  };
>>>
>>> -enum ravb_chip_id {
>>> -	RCAR_GEN2,
>>> -	RCAR_GEN3,
>>> -};
>>> -
>>>   struct ravb_hw_info {
>>>   	const char (*gstrings_stats)[ETH_GSTRING_LEN];
>>>   	size_t gstrings_size;
>>>   	netdev_features_t net_hw_features;
>>>   	netdev_features_t net_features;
>>> -	enum ravb_chip_id chip_id;
>>>   	int stats_len;
>>>   	size_t max_rx_len;
>>
>>     I would put the above in a spearte patch...

    Separate. :-)

>>>   	unsigned aligned_tx: 1;
>>> @@ -999,6 +993,7 @@ struct ravb_hw_info {
>>>   	unsigned tx_counters:1;		/* E-MAC has TX counters */
>>>   	unsigned multi_irqs:1;		/* AVB-DMAC and E-MAC has multiple
>> irqs */
>>>   	unsigned no_ptp_cfg_active:1;	/* AVB-DMAC does not support gPTP
>> active in config mode */
>>> +	unsigned ptp_cfg_active:1;	/* AVB-DMAC has gPTP support active in
>> config mode */
>>
>>     Huh?
>>
>>>   };
>>>
>>>   struct ravb_private {
>> [...]
>>> @@ -2216,7 +2213,7 @@ static int ravb_probe(struct platform_device
>> *pdev)
>>>   	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&priv->ts_skb_list);
>>>
>>>   	/* Initialise PTP Clock driver */
>>> -	if (info->chip_id != RCAR_GEN2)
>>> +	if (info->ptp_cfg_active)
>>>   		ravb_ptp_init(ndev, pdev);
>>
>>     What's that? Didn't you touch this lie in patch #3?
>>
>>     This seems lie a NAK bait... :-(
> 
> Please refer the original patch[1] which introduced gPTP support active in config mode.
> I am sure this will clear all your doubts.

    It hasn't. Why do we need 2 bit fields (1 "positive" and 1 "negative") for 
the same feature is beyond me.

> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c?h=next-20210825&id=f5d7837f96e53a8c9b6c49e1bc95cf0ae88b99e8
> 
> Regards,
> Biju

MBR, Sergey