[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87bjkgzt52.fsf@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2025 18:32:41 +0100
From: Paolo Valerio <pvalerio@...hat.com>
To: Théo Lebrun <theo.lebrun@...tlin.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>, Claudiu Beznea
<claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David
S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub
Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Lorenzo
Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>, Thomas Petazzoni
<thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, Grégory Clement
<gregory.clement@...tlin.com>, Benoît Monin
<benoit.monin@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 4/6] cadence: macb/gem: add XDP support for
gem
On 27 Nov 2025 at 03:41:56 PM, Théo Lebrun <theo.lebrun@...tlin.com> wrote:
> On Wed Nov 19, 2025 at 2:53 PM CET, Paolo Valerio wrote:
>> @@ -1273,6 +1275,7 @@ struct macb_queue {
>> struct queue_stats stats;
>> struct page_pool *page_pool;
>> struct sk_buff *skb;
>> + struct xdp_rxq_info xdp_q;
>> };
>
> Those are always named `xdp_rxq` inside the kernel, we should stick with
> the calling convention no?
>
sure
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_main.c
>> index 5829c1f773dd..53ea1958b8e4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb_main.c
>> @@ -1344,10 +1344,51 @@ static void discard_partial_frame(struct macb_queue *queue, unsigned int begin,
>> */
>> }
>>
>> +static u32 gem_xdp_run(struct macb_queue *queue, struct xdp_buff *xdp,
>> + struct net_device *dev)
>
> Why pass `struct net_device` explicitly? It is in queue->bp->dev.
>
let's avoid this
>> +{
>> + struct bpf_prog *prog;
>> + u32 act = XDP_PASS;
>> +
>> + rcu_read_lock();
>> +
>> + prog = rcu_dereference(queue->bp->prog);
>> + if (!prog)
>> + goto out;
>> +
>> + act = bpf_prog_run_xdp(prog, xdp);
>> + switch (act) {
>> + case XDP_PASS:
>> + goto out;
>> + case XDP_REDIRECT:
>> + if (unlikely(xdp_do_redirect(dev, xdp, prog))) {
>> + act = XDP_DROP;
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + goto out;
>
> Why the `unlikely()`?
>
just expecting the err path to be the exception, although this is not
consistend with the XDP_TX path.
Do you prefer to remove it?
>> + default:
>> + bpf_warn_invalid_xdp_action(dev, prog, act);
>> + fallthrough;
>> + case XDP_ABORTED:
>> + trace_xdp_exception(dev, prog, act);
>> + fallthrough;
>> + case XDP_DROP:
>> + break;
>> + }
>> +
>> + page_pool_put_full_page(queue->page_pool,
>> + virt_to_head_page(xdp->data), true);
>
> Maybe move that to the XDP_DROP, it is the only `break` in the above
> switch statement. It will be used by the default and XDP_ABORTED cases
> through fallthrough. We can avoid the out label and its two gotos that
> way.
>
We'd not put to page pool in case the redirect fails or am I missing
something?
>> static int gem_rx(struct macb_queue *queue, struct napi_struct *napi,
>> int budget)
>> {
>> struct macb *bp = queue->bp;
>> + bool xdp_flush = false;
>> unsigned int len;
>> unsigned int entry;
>> void *data;
>> @@ -1356,9 +1397,11 @@ static int gem_rx(struct macb_queue *queue, struct napi_struct *napi,
>> int count = 0;
>>
>> while (count < budget) {
>> - u32 ctrl;
>> - dma_addr_t addr;
>> bool rxused, first_frame;
>> + struct xdp_buff xdp;
>> + dma_addr_t addr;
>> + u32 ctrl;
>> + u32 ret;
>>
>> entry = macb_rx_ring_wrap(bp, queue->rx_tail);
>> desc = macb_rx_desc(queue, entry);
>> @@ -1403,6 +1446,22 @@ static int gem_rx(struct macb_queue *queue, struct napi_struct *napi,
>> data_len = SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(bp->rx_buffer_size) - bp->rx_offset;
>> }
>>
>> + if (!(ctrl & MACB_BIT(RX_SOF) && ctrl & MACB_BIT(RX_EOF)))
>> + goto skip_xdp;
>> +
>> + xdp_init_buff(&xdp, bp->rx_buffer_size, &queue->xdp_q);
>> + xdp_prepare_buff(&xdp, data, bp->rx_offset, len,
>> + false);
>> + xdp_buff_clear_frags_flag(&xdp);
>
> You prepare the XDP buffer before checking an XDP program is attached.
> Could we avoid this work? We'd move the xdp_buff preparation into
> gem_xdp_run(), after the RCU pointer dereference.
>
ack, makes sense
>> -static void gem_create_page_pool(struct macb_queue *queue)
>> +static void gem_create_page_pool(struct macb_queue *queue, int qid)
>> {
>> struct page_pool_params pp_params = {
>> .order = 0,
>> .flags = PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP | PP_FLAG_DMA_SYNC_DEV,
>> .pool_size = queue->bp->rx_ring_size,
>> .nid = NUMA_NO_NODE,
>> - .dma_dir = DMA_FROM_DEVICE,
>> + .dma_dir = rcu_access_pointer(queue->bp->prog)
>> + ? DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL
>> + : DMA_FROM_DEVICE,
>
> Ah, that is the reason for page_pool_get_dma_dir() calls!
>
:)
>> static int macb_change_mtu(struct net_device *dev, int new_mtu)
>> {
>> + int frame_size = new_mtu + ETH_HLEN + ETH_FCS_LEN + MACB_MAX_PAD;
>> + struct macb *bp = netdev_priv(dev);
>> + struct bpf_prog *prog = bp->prog;
>
> No fancy RCU macro?
>
right, guess an rcu_access_pointer() call is needed here
>> +static int macb_xdp(struct net_device *dev, struct netdev_bpf *xdp)
>> +{
>> + struct macb *bp = netdev_priv(dev);
>> +
>> + if (!macb_is_gem(bp))
>> + return 0;
>
> Returning 0 sounds like a mistake, -EOPNOTSUPP sounds more appropriate.
>
agreed
>> + switch (xdp->command) {
>> + case XDP_SETUP_PROG:
>> + return gem_xdp_setup(dev, xdp->prog, xdp->extack);
>> + default:
>> + return -EINVAL;
>
> Same here: we want -EOPNOTSUPP. Otherwise caller cannot dissociate an
> unsupported call from one that is supported but failed.
>
ack
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> static void gem_update_stats(struct macb *bp)
>> {
>> struct macb_queue *queue;
>> @@ -4390,6 +4529,7 @@ static const struct net_device_ops macb_netdev_ops = {
>> .ndo_hwtstamp_set = macb_hwtstamp_set,
>> .ndo_hwtstamp_get = macb_hwtstamp_get,
>> .ndo_setup_tc = macb_setup_tc,
>> + .ndo_bpf = macb_xdp,
>
> We want it to be "gem_" prefixed as it does not support MACB.
>
ack
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Théo Lebrun, Bootlin
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> https://bootlin.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists