[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <hxds75erxqcfkufxnfbyo2up4b4jeicmi3f5xr6qlb3yf7fe76@4byeq62jhu4o>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2023 17:07:24 -0600
From: Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@...hat.com>
To: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>
Cc: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] net: stmmac: don't create a MDIO bus if
unnecessary
On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 01:16:12AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 03:12:40PM -0600, Andrew Halaney wrote:
> > The stmmac_dt_phy() function, which parses the devicetree node of the
> > MAC and ultimately causes MDIO bus allocation, misinterprets what
> > fixed-link means in relation to the MAC's MDIO bus. This results in
> > a MDIO bus being created in situations it need not be.
> >
> > Currently a MDIO bus is created if the description is either:
> >
> > 1. Not fixed-link
> > 2. fixed-link but contains a MDIO bus as well
> >
> > The "1" case above isn't always accurate. If there's a phy-handle,
> > it could be referencing a phy on another MDIO controller's bus[1]. In
> > this case currently the MAC will make a MDIO bus and scan it all
> > anyways unnecessarily.
> >
> > There's also a lot of upstream devicetrees[2] that expect a MDIO bus to
> > be created and scanned for a phy. This case can also be inferred from
> > the platform description by not having a phy-handle && not being
> > fixed-link. This hits case "1" in the current driver's logic.
> >
> > Let's improve the logic to create a MDIO bus if either:
> >
>
> > - Devicetree contains a MDIO bus
> > - !fixed-link && !phy-handle (legacy handling)
>
> If what you suggest here is a free from regressions semantics change
> (really hope it is) I will be with both my hands for it. This will
> solve the problem we have with one of our device which doesn't have
> SMA interface (hardware designers decided to save ~4K gates of the
> chip area) but has a PHY externally attached to the DW XGMAC<->XPCS
> interface. PHY is accessible via a GPIO-based MDIO bus. BTW having no
> SMA interface available on a DW *MAC device but creating the MDIO-bus
> on top of the non-existent SMA CSRs anyway causes having _32_ dummy
> PHYs created with zero IDs.
I hope it is regression free! I have tested both the [1] and [2] cases
(I hacked up the devicetree for [1] to make it look like [2]) without
any issue.
Sorry, I don't have any docs for stmmac hardware so this might be
answered in there (or just common net knowledge that I can't find
online)... what's SMA stand for? I assume it's the MDIO interface.
I agree though, if you have a phy-handle and no mdio node in your
devicetree this patch series should bail out without registering a bus
in stmmac_mdio_register().
>
> >
> > Below upstream devicetree snippets can be found that explain some of
> > the cases above more concretely.
<snip>
> > - if (mdio) {
> > - plat->mdio_bus_data =
> > - devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct stmmac_mdio_bus_data),
> > - GFP_KERNEL);
>
> > + /* Legacy devicetrees allowed for no MDIO bus description and expect
> > + * the bus to be scanned for devices. If there's no phy or fixed-link
> > + * described assume this is the case since there must be something
> > + * connected to the MAC.
> > + */
> > + legacy_mdio = !of_phy_is_fixed_link(np) && !plat->phy_node;
> > + if (legacy_mdio)
> > + dev_info(dev, "Deprecated MDIO bus assumption used\n");
> > +
> > + if (plat->mdio_node || legacy_mdio) {
> > + plat->mdio_bus_data = devm_kzalloc(dev,
>
> Special thanks for adding the comment above this code. It will really
> save time of figuring out why MDIO-bus needs to be created anyway.
>
> > + sizeof(struct stmmac_mdio_bus_data),
>
> Should v4 is required I would suggest to change this to
> sizeof(*plat->mdio_bus_data).
>
> Anyway feel free to add:
> Reviewed-by: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>
>
> -Serge(y)
Sure I will spin v4 to pick that up, thanks for catching it. I'll also
improve the motivation in the commit message a hair more per Andrew
Lunn's request over here on v2 (and will hold off a little bit just to
make sure reviews come in before a respin):
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/e64b14c3-4b80-4120-8cc4-9baa40cdcb75@lunn.ch/
Thanks,
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists