[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220222165217.62426462@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 16:52:17 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] net: dsa: microchip: ksz9477: implement
MTU configuration
On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 09:43:28 +0100 Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> This chips supports two ways to configure max MTU size:
> - by setting SW_LEGAL_PACKET_DISABLE bit: if this bit is 0 allowed packed size
> will be between 64 and bytes 1518. If this bit is 1, it will accept
> packets up to 2000 bytes.
> - by setting SW_JUMBO_PACKET bit. If this bit is set, the chip will
> ignore SW_LEGAL_PACKET_DISABLE value and use REG_SW_MTU__2 register to
> configure MTU size.
>
> Current driver has disabled SW_JUMBO_PACKET bit and activates
> SW_LEGAL_PACKET_DISABLE. So the switch will pass all packets up to 2000 without
> any way to configure it.
>
> By providing port_change_mtu we are switch to SW_JUMBO_PACKET way and will
> be able to configure MTU up to ~9000.
And it has no negative side affects to always have jumbo enabled?
Maybe the internal buffer will be carved up in a different way?
> +static int ksz9477_change_mtu(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, int mtu)
> +{
> + struct ksz_device *dev = ds->priv;
> + u16 new_mtu, max_mtu = 0;
> + int i;
> +
> + new_mtu = mtu + ETH_HLEN + VLAN_HLEN + ETH_FCS_LEN;
> +
> + if (dsa_is_cpu_port(ds, port))
> + new_mtu += KSZ9477_INGRESS_TAG_LEN;
> +
> + /* Cache the per-port MTU setting */
> + dev->ports[port].max_mtu = new_mtu;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < dev->port_cnt; i++) {
> + if (dev->ports[i].max_mtu > max_mtu)
> + max_mtu = dev->ports[i].max_mtu;
> + }
nit:
for (...)
max_mtu = max(max_mtu, dev->ports[i].max_mtu)
> @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ struct ksz_port {
>
> struct ksz_port_mib mib;
> phy_interface_t interface;
> + unsigned int max_mtu;
> };
max_mtu already has two meanings in this patch, let's call this
max_frame or max_len etc, instead of adding a third meaning.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists