| Message ID | 20210224061205.23270-1-dqfext@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [RFC,net-next] net: dsa: rtl8366rb: support bridge offloading | expand |
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 7:12 AM DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com> wrote: > Use port isolation registers to configure bridge offloading. > Remove the VLAN init, as we have proper CPU tag and bridge offloading > support now. > > Signed-off-by: DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com> > --- > This is not tested, as I don't have a RTL8366RB board. And I think there > is potential race condition in port_bridge_{join,leave}. Compilation failed for me like this: ../drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c:1573:23: error: initialization of 'void (*)(struct dsa_switch *, int, struct net_device *)' from incompatible pointer type 'int (*)(struct dsa_switch *, int, struct net_device *)' [-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types] 1573 | .port_bridge_leave = rtl8366rb_port_bridge_leave, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ../drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c:1573:23: note: (near initialization for 'rtl8366rb_switch_ops.port_bridge_leave') I fixed it like this: diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c b/drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c index e7abf846350d..0719fadadc3d 100644 --- a/drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c @@ -1161,7 +1161,7 @@ rtl8366rb_port_bridge_join(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, 0, port_bitmap << 1); } -static int +static void rtl8366rb_port_bridge_leave(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, struct net_device *bridge) { @@ -1176,14 +1176,17 @@ rtl8366rb_port_bridge_leave(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, continue; ret = regmap_update_bits(smi->map, RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO(i), BIT(port + 1), 0); - if (ret) - return ret; + if (ret) { + dev_err(smi->dev, "failed to leave port %d from bridge\n", + port); + return; + } port_bitmap |= BIT(i); } - return regmap_update_bits(smi->map, RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO(port), - port_bitmap << 1, 0); + regmap_update_bits(smi->map, RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO(port), + port_bitmap << 1, 0); } After this it works like a charm. > - ret = rtl8366_init_vlan(smi); > - if (ret) > - return ret; I suppose we can delete that confused VLAN set-up after this. > - ds->configure_vlan_while_not_filtering = false; This is default true not IIUC so we should be good! With my minor changes: Tested-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> Yours, Linus Walleij
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 7:12 AM DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com> wrote: > +/* Port isolation registers */ > +#define RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_BASE 0x0F08 > +#define RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO(pnum) (RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_BASE + (pnum)) > +#define RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_EN BIT(0) > +#define RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_PORTS_MASK GENMASK(7, 1) BTW where did you find this register? It's not in any of my vendor driver code dumps. Curious! Yours, Linus Walleij
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 9:55 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote: > > BTW where did you find this register? It's not in any of my > vendor driver code dumps. DD-WRT https://svn.dd-wrt.com/browser/src/linux/universal/linux-4.14/drivers/net/ethernet/ag7100/RTL8366RB_DRIVER/rtl8368s_reg.h#L581 > > Curious! > > Yours, > Linus Walleij
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 9:48 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote: > With my minor changes: > Tested-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> How about using a mutex lock in port_bridge_{join,leave} ? In my opinion all functions that access multiple registers should be synchronized. > Yours, > Linus Walleij
On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 4:58 AM DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 9:48 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote: > > With my minor changes: > > Tested-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> > > How about using a mutex lock in port_bridge_{join,leave} ? > In my opinion all functions that access multiple registers should be > synchronized. That's one way, in some cases the framework (DSA) serialize the accesses so I don't know if that already happens on a higher level? Since it is accessed over a slow bus we should go for mutex in that case indeed. Yours, Linus Walleij
On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 05:05:00PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 4:58 AM DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 9:48 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote: > > > With my minor changes: > > > Tested-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> > > > > How about using a mutex lock in port_bridge_{join,leave} ? > > In my opinion all functions that access multiple registers should be > > synchronized. > > That's one way, in some cases the framework (DSA) serialize > the accesses so I don't know if that already happens on a > higher level? Since it is accessed over a slow bus we should go > for mutex in that case indeed. DSA does not serialize this. The .port_bridge_join and .port_bridge_leave calls are initiated from the NETDEV_CHANGEUPPER net device event, which is called under rtnl_mutex (see call_netdevice_notifiers). This is pretty fundamental and I don't think it will ever change. However, if you still want to add an extra layer of locking (with code paths that for some reason are not under the rtnl_mutex), then go ahead, I suppose. It will be challenging to make sure they do something that isn't snake oil, though.
On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 5:11 PM Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 05:05:00PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 4:58 AM DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 9:48 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > With my minor changes: > > > > Tested-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> > > > > > > How about using a mutex lock in port_bridge_{join,leave} ? > > > In my opinion all functions that access multiple registers should be > > > synchronized. > > > > That's one way, in some cases the framework (DSA) serialize > > the accesses so I don't know if that already happens on a > > higher level? Since it is accessed over a slow bus we should go > > for mutex in that case indeed. > > DSA does not serialize this. The .port_bridge_join and > .port_bridge_leave calls are initiated from the NETDEV_CHANGEUPPER net > device event, which is called under rtnl_mutex (see call_netdevice_notifiers). > This is pretty fundamental and I don't think it will ever change. > > However, if you still want to add an extra layer of locking (with code > paths that for some reason are not under the rtnl_mutex), then go ahead, > I suppose. It will be challenging to make sure they do something that > isn't snake oil, though. Nah, just didn't know if was already in place. I suggest Qingfang go with a driver-local mutex (it may already be needed in more places). Yours, Linus Walleij
On 2/23/2021 10:12 PM, DENG Qingfang wrote: > Use port isolation registers to configure bridge offloading. > Remove the VLAN init, as we have proper CPU tag and bridge offloading > support now. > > Signed-off-by: DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com> > --- > This is not tested, as I don't have a RTL8366RB board. And I think there > is potential race condition in port_bridge_{join,leave}. > > drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c b/drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c > index a89093bc6c6a..9f6e2b361216 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c > +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c > @@ -300,6 +300,12 @@ > #define RTL8366RB_INTERRUPT_STATUS_REG 0x0442 > #define RTL8366RB_NUM_INTERRUPT 14 /* 0..13 */ > > +/* Port isolation registers */ > +#define RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_BASE 0x0F08 > +#define RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO(pnum) (RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_BASE + (pnum)) > +#define RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_EN BIT(0) > +#define RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_PORTS_MASK GENMASK(7, 1) > + > /* bits 0..5 enable force when cleared */ > #define RTL8366RB_MAC_FORCE_CTRL_REG 0x0F11 > > @@ -835,6 +841,15 @@ static int rtl8366rb_setup(struct dsa_switch *ds) > if (ret) > return ret; > > + /* Isolate user ports */ > + for (i = 0; i < RTL8366RB_PORT_NUM_CPU; i++) { > + ret = regmap_write(smi->map, RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO(i), > + RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_EN | > + BIT(RTL8366RB_PORT_NUM_CPU + 1)); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + } > + > /* Set up the "green ethernet" feature */ > ret = rtl8366rb_jam_table(rtl8366rb_green_jam, > ARRAY_SIZE(rtl8366rb_green_jam), smi, false); > @@ -963,10 +978,6 @@ static int rtl8366rb_setup(struct dsa_switch *ds) > return ret; > } > > - ret = rtl8366_init_vlan(smi); > - if (ret) > - return ret; > - > ret = rtl8366rb_setup_cascaded_irq(smi); > if (ret) > dev_info(smi->dev, "no interrupt support\n"); > @@ -977,8 +988,6 @@ static int rtl8366rb_setup(struct dsa_switch *ds) > return -ENODEV; > } > > - ds->configure_vlan_while_not_filtering = false; If you have a configuration with ports that are part of a bridge with VLAN filtering enabled, what happens to the standalone ports, are they a member of a default VLAN entry still? -- Florian
diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c b/drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c index a89093bc6c6a..9f6e2b361216 100644 --- a/drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c @@ -300,6 +300,12 @@ #define RTL8366RB_INTERRUPT_STATUS_REG 0x0442 #define RTL8366RB_NUM_INTERRUPT 14 /* 0..13 */ +/* Port isolation registers */ +#define RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_BASE 0x0F08 +#define RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO(pnum) (RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_BASE + (pnum)) +#define RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_EN BIT(0) +#define RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_PORTS_MASK GENMASK(7, 1) + /* bits 0..5 enable force when cleared */ #define RTL8366RB_MAC_FORCE_CTRL_REG 0x0F11 @@ -835,6 +841,15 @@ static int rtl8366rb_setup(struct dsa_switch *ds) if (ret) return ret; + /* Isolate user ports */ + for (i = 0; i < RTL8366RB_PORT_NUM_CPU; i++) { + ret = regmap_write(smi->map, RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO(i), + RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO_EN | + BIT(RTL8366RB_PORT_NUM_CPU + 1)); + if (ret) + return ret; + } + /* Set up the "green ethernet" feature */ ret = rtl8366rb_jam_table(rtl8366rb_green_jam, ARRAY_SIZE(rtl8366rb_green_jam), smi, false); @@ -963,10 +978,6 @@ static int rtl8366rb_setup(struct dsa_switch *ds) return ret; } - ret = rtl8366_init_vlan(smi); - if (ret) - return ret; - ret = rtl8366rb_setup_cascaded_irq(smi); if (ret) dev_info(smi->dev, "no interrupt support\n"); @@ -977,8 +988,6 @@ static int rtl8366rb_setup(struct dsa_switch *ds) return -ENODEV; } - ds->configure_vlan_while_not_filtering = false; - return 0; } @@ -1127,6 +1136,56 @@ rtl8366rb_port_disable(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port) rb8366rb_set_port_led(smi, port, false); } +static int +rtl8366rb_port_bridge_join(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, + struct net_device *bridge) +{ + struct realtek_smi *smi = ds->priv; + unsigned int port_bitmap = 0; + int ret, i; + + for (i = 0; i < RTL8366RB_PORT_NUM_CPU; i++) { + if (i == port) + continue; + if (dsa_to_port(ds, i)->bridge_dev != bridge) + continue; + ret = regmap_update_bits(smi->map, RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO(i), + 0, BIT(port + 1)); + if (ret) + return ret; + + port_bitmap |= BIT(i); + } + + return regmap_update_bits(smi->map, RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO(port), + 0, port_bitmap << 1); +} + +static int +rtl8366rb_port_bridge_leave(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, + struct net_device *bridge) +{ + struct realtek_smi *smi = ds->priv; + unsigned int port_bitmap = 0; + int ret, i; + + for (i = 0; i < RTL8366RB_PORT_NUM_CPU; i++) { + if (i == port) + continue; + if (dsa_to_port(ds, i)->bridge_dev != bridge) + continue; + ret = regmap_update_bits(smi->map, RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO(i), + BIT(port + 1), 0); + if (ret) + return ret; + + port_bitmap |= BIT(i); + } + + return regmap_update_bits(smi->map, RTL8366RB_PORT_ISO(port), + port_bitmap << 1, 0); +} + static int rtl8366rb_change_mtu(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, int new_mtu) { struct realtek_smi *smi = ds->priv; @@ -1510,6 +1569,8 @@ static const struct dsa_switch_ops rtl8366rb_switch_ops = { .get_strings = rtl8366_get_strings, .get_ethtool_stats = rtl8366_get_ethtool_stats, .get_sset_count = rtl8366_get_sset_count, + .port_bridge_join = rtl8366rb_port_bridge_join, + .port_bridge_leave = rtl8366rb_port_bridge_leave, .port_vlan_filtering = rtl8366_vlan_filtering, .port_vlan_add = rtl8366_vlan_add, .port_vlan_del = rtl8366_vlan_del,
Use port isolation registers to configure bridge offloading. Remove the VLAN init, as we have proper CPU tag and bridge offloading support now. Signed-off-by: DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com> --- This is not tested, as I don't have a RTL8366RB board. And I think there is potential race condition in port_bridge_{join,leave}. drivers/net/dsa/rtl8366rb.c | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)