netdev - RE: [RFC 00/12] Add functional support for Gigabit Ethernet driver

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:   Tue, 5 Oct 2021 12:04:49 +0000
From:   Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>
To:     Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@....ru>,
        "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: [RFC 00/12] Add functional support for Gigabit Ethernet driver

Hi Sergey,

> Subject: Re: [RFC 00/12] Add functional support for Gigabit Ethernet
> driver
> 
> On 10/5/21 2:06 PM, Biju Das wrote:
> 
> > The DMAC and EMAC blocks of Gigabit Ethernet IP found on RZ/G2L SoC
> > are similar to the R-Car Ethernet AVB IP.
> >
> > The Gigabit Ethernet IP consists of Ethernet controller (E-MAC),
> > Internal TCP/IP Offload Engine (TOE)  and Dedicated Direct memory
> > access controller (DMAC).
> >
> > With a few changes in the driver we can support both IPs.
> >
> > This patch series is aims to add functional support for Gigabit
> > Ethernet driver by filling all the stubs.
> >
> > Ref:-
> > https://jpn01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flore
> > .kernel.org%2Flinux-renesas-soc%2FOS0PR01MB5922240F88E5E0FD989ECDF386A
> > C9%40OS0PR01MB5922.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com%2FT%2F%23m8dee0a1b14d505d
> > 4611cad8c10e4017a30db55d6&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cbiju.das.jz%40bp.renesas.
> > com%7C880ddc38cf254b0a81fc08d987f6ea17%7C53d82571da1947e49cb4625a166a4
> > a2a%7C0%7C0%7C637690316835703147%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wL
> > jAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata
> > =WmbtErppjUTywkNet%2FtDKw9v5gqaqRlcHGjI3PZ1UN8%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >
> > RFC changes:
> >  * used ALIGN macro for calculating the value for max_rx_len.
> >  * used rx_max_buf_size instead of rx_2k_buffers feature bit.
> >  * moved struct ravb_rx_desc *gbeth_rx_ring near to
> ravb_private::rx_ring
> >    and allocating it for 1 RX queue.
> >  * Started using gbeth_rx_ring instead of gbeth_rx_ring[q].
> >  * renamed ravb_alloc_rx_desc to ravb_alloc_rx_desc_rcar
> >  * renamed ravb_rx_ring_free to ravb_rx_ring_free_rcar
> >  * renamed ravb_rx_ring_format to ravb_rx_ring_format_rcar
> >  * renamed ravb_rcar_rx to ravb_rx_rcar
> >  * renamed "tsrq" variable
> >  * Updated the comments
> >
> > Biju Das (12):
> >   ravb: Use ALIGN macro for max_rx_len
> >   ravb: Add rx_max_buf_size to struct ravb_hw_info
> >   ravb: Fillup ravb_set_features_gbeth() stub
> >   ravb: Fillup ravb_alloc_rx_desc_gbeth() stub
> >   ravb: Fillup ravb_rx_ring_free_gbeth() stub
> >   ravb: Fillup ravb_rx_ring_format_gbeth() stub
> >   ravb: Fillup ravb_rx_gbeth() stub
> >   ravb: Add carrier_counters to struct ravb_hw_info
> >   ravb: Add support to retrieve stats for GbEthernet
> >   ravb: Rename "tsrq" variable
> >   ravb: Optimize ravb_emac_init_gbeth function
> >   ravb: Update/Add comments
> >
> >  drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb.h      |  51 +++-
> >  drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c | 349
> > +++++++++++++++++++++--
> >  2 files changed, 367 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> 
>    I dodn;'t expect the patchset to be reposted so soon but I'll switch to
> reviewing it insted of the previously posted 8-patch series...

Previous patchset posted as actual patch and there is a suggestion[1] to send it as RFC.
That is the reason I have send it as RFC. I have incorporated your lastest comment from previously
posted 8-patch series in this new RFC patchset.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-renesas-soc/OS0PR01MB5922240F88E5E0FD989ECDF386AC9@OS0PR01MB5922.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com/T/#m8dee0a1b14d505d4611cad8c10e4017a30db55d6

Regards,
biju

> 
> MBR, Sergey