Re: [PATCH 4/4] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: add ethtool channels support
From: Ivan Khoronzhuk
Date: Tue Jul 19 2016 - 09:39:41 EST
On 08.07.16 16:33, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
On 06/30/2016 10:04 PM, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
These ops allow to control number of channels driver is allowed to
work with. The maximum number of channels is 8 for rx and 8 for tx.
After this patch the following commands are possible:
$ ethtool -l eth0
$ ethtool -L eth0 rx 6 tx 6
Could you add some description here about switch vs dual_mac behavior?
I will add, but, maybe here should be some changes + info about how to share channels
between two interfaces. Would you like me to add some concrete description?
Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c | 188 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 188 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
index 595ed56..729b8be 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
@@ -740,6 +740,11 @@ static void cpsw_rx_handler(void *token, int len, int status)
}
requeue:
+ if (netif_dormant(ndev)) {
+ dev_kfree_skb_any(new_skb);
+ return;
+ }
+
ch = priv->rxch[skb_get_queue_mapping(new_skb)];
ret = cpdma_chan_submit(ch, new_skb, new_skb->data,
skb_tailroom(new_skb), 0);
@@ -2077,6 +2082,187 @@ static void cpsw_ethtool_op_complete(struct net_device *ndev)
cpsw_err(priv, drv, "ethtool complete failed %d\n", ret);
}
+static void cpsw_get_channels(struct net_device *dev,
+ struct ethtool_channels *ch)
+{
+ struct cpsw_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
+
+ ch->max_combined = 0;
+ ch->max_rx = CPSW_MAX_QUEUES;
+ ch->max_tx = CPSW_MAX_QUEUES;
+ ch->max_other = 0;
+ ch->other_count = 0;
+ ch->rx_count = priv->rx_ch_num;
+ ch->tx_count = priv->tx_ch_num;
+ ch->combined_count = 0;
+}
+
+static int cpsw_check_ch_settings(struct cpsw_priv *priv,
+ struct ethtool_channels *ch)
+{
+ if (ch->combined_count)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ /* verify we have at least one channel in each direction */
+ if (!ch->rx_count || !ch->tx_count)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (ch->rx_count > priv->data.channels ||
+ ch->tx_count > priv->data.channels)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void cpsw_sync_dual_ch_list(struct net_device *sdev,
+ struct net_device *ddev)
+{
+ struct cpsw_priv *priv_s, *priv_d;
+ int i;
+
+ priv_s = netdev_priv(sdev);
+ priv_d = netdev_priv(ddev);
+
+ priv_d->rx_ch_num = priv_s->rx_ch_num;
+ priv_d->tx_ch_num = priv_s->tx_ch_num;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < priv_d->tx_ch_num; i++)
+ priv_d->txch[i] = priv_s->txch[i];
+ for (i = 0; i < priv_d->rx_ch_num; i++)
+ priv_d->rxch[i] = priv_s->rxch[i];
+}
+
+static int cpsw_update_channels_res(struct cpsw_priv *priv, int ch_num, int rx)
+{
+ int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int);
+ void (*handler)(void *, int, int);
+ struct cpdma_chan **chan;
+ int *ch;
+ int ret;
+
+ if (rx) {
+ ch = &priv->rx_ch_num;
+ chan = priv->rxch;
+ handler = cpsw_rx_handler;
+ poll = cpsw_rx_poll;
+ } else {
+ ch = &priv->tx_ch_num;
+ chan = priv->txch;
+ handler = cpsw_tx_handler;
+ poll = cpsw_tx_poll;
+ }
+
+ while (*ch < ch_num) {
+ chan[*ch] = cpdma_chan_create(priv->dma, *ch, handler, rx);
+
+ if (IS_ERR(chan[*ch]))
+ return PTR_ERR(chan[*ch]);
+
+ if (!chan[*ch])
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ dev_info(priv->dev, "created new %d %s channel\n", *ch,
+ (rx ? "rx" : "tx"));
+ (*ch)++;
+ }
+
+ while (*ch > ch_num) {
+ int tch = *ch - 1;
why tch? can you use more informative names
Yep. Will correct.
+
+ ret = cpdma_chan_destroy(chan[tch]);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ dev_info(priv->dev, "destroyed %d %s channel\n", tch,
+ (rx ? "rx" : "tx"));
+ (*ch)--;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int cpsw_update_channels(struct net_device *dev,
+ struct ethtool_channels *ch)
+{
+ struct cpsw_priv *priv;
+ int ret;
+
+ priv = netdev_priv(dev);
+
+ ret = cpsw_update_channels_res(priv, ch->rx_count, 1);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ ret = cpsw_update_channels_res(priv, ch->tx_count, 0);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ if (priv->data.dual_emac) {
+ int i;
+ /* mirror channels for another SL */
+ for (i = 0; i < priv->data.slaves; i++) {
+ if (priv->slaves[i].ndev == dev)
+ continue;
+
+ cpsw_sync_dual_ch_list(dev, priv->slaves[i].ndev);
+ }
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int cpsw_set_channels(struct net_device *ndev,
+ struct ethtool_channels *chs)
+{
+ struct cpsw_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = cpsw_check_ch_settings(priv, chs);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return ret;
+
+ if (netif_running(ndev)) {
+ netif_tx_stop_all_queues(ndev);
+ cpsw_intr_disable(priv);
+ netif_dormant_on(ndev);
+ cpdma_ctlr_stop(priv->dma);
+ }
+
+ ret = cpsw_update_channels(ndev, chs);
+ if (ret)
+ goto err;
+
+ if (netif_running(ndev)) {
+ /* inform stach about new count of queues */
+ ret = netif_set_real_num_tx_queues(ndev, priv->tx_ch_num);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(priv->dev, "cannot set real number of tx queues\n");
+ goto err;
+ }
+
+ ret = netif_set_real_num_rx_queues(ndev, priv->rx_ch_num);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(priv->dev, "cannot set real number of rx queues\n");
+ goto err;
+ }
You're synchronizing slaves channels for dual_mac mode above, but updating netif real_num_XY_queues()
only for current netdev. Is it correct?
It seems to be an issue. I'm going to change behavior for dual mode a little, and will keep it in mind.
+
+ netif_dormant_off(ndev);
+
+ if (cpsw_fill_rx_channels(ndev))
+ goto err;
+
+ cpdma_ctlr_start(priv->dma);
+ cpsw_intr_enable(priv);
+ netif_tx_start_all_queues(ndev);
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+err:
+ dev_err(priv->dev, "cannot update channels number, closing device\n");
+ dev_close(ndev);
+ return ret;
+}
+
static const struct ethtool_ops cpsw_ethtool_ops = {
.get_drvinfo = cpsw_get_drvinfo,
.get_msglevel = cpsw_get_msglevel,
@@ -2098,6 +2284,8 @@ static const struct ethtool_ops cpsw_ethtool_ops = {
.get_regs = cpsw_get_regs,
.begin = cpsw_ethtool_op_begin,
.complete = cpsw_ethtool_op_complete,
+ .get_channels = cpsw_get_channels,
+ .set_channels = cpsw_set_channels,
};
static void cpsw_slave_init(struct cpsw_slave *slave, struct cpsw_priv *priv,
--
Regards,
Ivan Khoronzhuk