Re: [PATCH net-next 0/1] Support for VLAN interface over HSR/PRP

From: Willem de Bruijn
Date: Fri Sep 04 2020 - 11:53:38 EST

Next message: Dmitry Osipenko: "Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] dt-bindings: mfd: Add ENE KB930 Embedded Controller binding"
Previous message: Cyril Hrubis: "Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2] syscall/ptrace08: Simplify the test."
In reply to: Murali Karicheri: "Re: [PATCH net-next 0/1] Support for VLAN interface over HSR/PRP"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 12:30 AM Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> On 9/2/20 12:14 PM, Murali Karicheri wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > On 9/1/20 3:54 PM, Murali Karicheri wrote:
> >> This series add support for creating VLAN interface over HSR or
> >> PRP interface. Typically industrial networks uses VLAN in
> >> deployment and this capability is needed to support these
> >> networks.
> >>
> >> This is tested using two TI AM572x IDK boards connected back
> >> to back over CPSW ports (eth0 and eth1).
> >>
> >> Following is the setup
> >>
> >> Physical Setup
> >> ++++++++++++++
> >> _______________ (CPSW) _______________
> >> | |----eth0-----| |
> >> |TI AM572x IDK1| | TI AM572x IDK2|
> >> |______________|----eth1-----|_______________|
> >>
> >>
> >> Network Topolgy
> >> +++++++++++++++
> >>
> >> TI AM571x IDK TI AM572x IDK
> >>
> >> 192.168.100.10 CPSW ports 192.168.100.20
> >> IDK-1 IDK-2
> >> hsr0/prp0.100--| 192.168.2.10 |--eth0--| 192.168.2.20 |--hsr0/prp0.100
> >> |----hsr0/prp0--| |---hsr0/prp0--|
> >> hsr0/prp0.101--| |--eth1--| |--hsr0/prp0/101
> >>
> >> 192.168.101.10 192.168.101.20
> >>
> >> Following tests:-
> >> - create hsr or prp interface and ping the interface IP address
> >> and verify ping is successful.
> >> - Create 2 VLANs over hsr or prp interface on both IDKs (VID 100 and
> >> 101). Ping between the IP address of the VLAN interfaces
> >> - Do iperf UDP traffic test with server on one IDK and client on the
> >> other. Do this using 100 and 101 subnet IP addresses
> >> - Dump /proc/net/vlan/{hsr|prp}0.100 and verify frames are transmitted
> >> and received at these interfaces.
> >> - Delete the vlan and hsr/prp interface and verify interfaces are
> >> removed cleanly.
> >>
> >> Logs for IDK-1 at https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/NxF83yZFDX/
> >> Logs for IDK-2 at https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/YBXBcsPgVK/
> >>
> >> Murali Karicheri (1):
> >> net: hsr/prp: add vlan support
> >>
> >> net/hsr/hsr_device.c | 4 ----
> >> net/hsr/hsr_forward.c | 16 +++++++++++++---
> >> 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >>
> > I am not sure if the packet flow is right for this?
> >
> > VLAN over HSR frame format is like this.
> >
> > <Start of Frame><VLAN tag><HSR Tag><IP><CRC>
> >
> > My ifconfig stats shows both hsr and hsr0.100 interfaces receiving
> > frames.
> >
> > So I did a WARN_ON() in HSR driver before frame is forwarded to upper
> > layer.
> >
> > a0868495local@uda0868495:~/Projects/upstream-kernel$ git diff
> > diff --git a/net/hsr/hsr_forward.c b/net/hsr/hsr_forward.c
> > index de21df30b0d9..545a3cd8c71b 100644
> > --- a/net/hsr/hsr_forward.c
> > +++ b/net/hsr/hsr_forward.c
> > @@ -415,9 +415,11 @@ static void hsr_forward_do(struct hsr_frame_info
> > *frame)
> > }
> >
> > skb->dev = port->dev;
> > - if (port->type == HSR_PT_MASTER)
> > + if (port->type == HSR_PT_MASTER) {
> > + if (skb_vlan_tag_present(skb))
> > + WARN_ON(1);
> > hsr_deliver_master(skb, port->dev,
> > frame->node_src);
> > - else
> > + } else
> > hsr_xmit(skb, port, frame);
> > }
> > }
> >
> > And I get the trace shown below.
> >
> > [ 275.125431] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at net/hsr/hsr_forward.c:420
> > hsr_forward_skb+0x460/0x564
> > [ 275.133822] Modules linked in: snd_soc_omap_hdmi snd_soc_ti_sdma
> > snd_soc_core snd_pcm_dmaengine snd_pcm snd_time4
> > [ 275.199705] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Tainted: G W
> > 5.9.0-rc1-00658-g473e463812c2-dirty #8
> > [ 275.209573] Hardware name: Generic DRA74X (Flattened Device Tree)
> > [ 275.215703] [<c011177c>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c010b6f0>]
> > (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
> > [ 275.223487] [<c010b6f0>] (show_stack) from [<c055690c>]
> > (dump_stack+0xc4/0xe4)
> > [ 275.230747] [<c055690c>] (dump_stack) from [<c01386ac>]
> > (__warn+0xc0/0xf4)
> > [ 275.237656] [<c01386ac>] (__warn) from [<c0138a3c>]
> > (warn_slowpath_fmt+0x58/0xb8)
> > [ 275.245177] [<c0138a3c>] (warn_slowpath_fmt) from [<c09564bc>]
> > (hsr_forward_skb+0x460/0x564)
> > [ 275.253657] [<c09564bc>] (hsr_forward_skb) from [<c0955534>]
> > (hsr_handle_frame+0x15c/0x190)
> > [ 275.262047] [<c0955534>] (hsr_handle_frame) from [<c07c6704>]
> > (__netif_receive_skb_core+0x23c/0xc88)
> > [ 275.271223] [<c07c6704>] (__netif_receive_skb_core) from [<c07c7180>]
> > (__netif_receive_skb_one_core+0x30/0x74)
> > [ 275.281266] [<c07c7180>] (__netif_receive_skb_one_core) from
> > [<c07c72a4>] (netif_receive_skb+0x50/0x1c4)
> > [ 275.290793] [<c07c72a4>] (netif_receive_skb) from [<c071a55c>]
> > (cpsw_rx_handler+0x230/0x308)
> > [ 275.299272] [<c071a55c>] (cpsw_rx_handler) from [<c0715ee8>]
> > (__cpdma_chan_process+0xf4/0x188)
> > [ 275.307925] [<c0715ee8>] (__cpdma_chan_process) from [<c0717294>]
> > (cpdma_chan_process+0x3c/0x5c)
> > [ 275.316754] [<c0717294>] (cpdma_chan_process) from [<c071dd14>]
> > (cpsw_rx_mq_poll+0x44/0x98)
> > [ 275.325145] [<c071dd14>] (cpsw_rx_mq_poll) from [<c07c8ae0>]
> > (net_rx_action+0xf0/0x400)
> > [ 275.333185] [<c07c8ae0>] (net_rx_action) from [<c0101370>]
> > (__do_softirq+0xf0/0x3ac)
> > [ 275.340965] [<c0101370>] (__do_softirq) from [<c013f5ec>]
> > (irq_exit+0xa8/0xe4)
> > [ 275.348224] [<c013f5ec>] (irq_exit) from [<c0199344>]
> > (__handle_domain_irq+0x6c/0xe0)
> > [ 275.356093] [<c0199344>] (__handle_domain_irq) from [<c056f8fc>]
> > (gic_handle_irq+0x4c/0xa8)
> > [ 275.364481] [<c056f8fc>] (gic_handle_irq) from [<c0100b6c>]
> > (__irq_svc+0x6c/0x90)
> > [ 275.371996] Exception stack(0xc0e01f18 to 0xc0e01f60)
> >
> > Shouldn't it show vlan_do_receive() ?
> >
> > if (skb_vlan_tag_present(skb)) {
> > if (pt_prev) {
> > ret = deliver_skb(skb, pt_prev, orig_dev);
> > pt_prev = NULL;
> > }
> > if (vlan_do_receive(&skb))
> > goto another_round;
> > else if (unlikely(!skb))
> > goto out;
> > }
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>
> I did an ftrace today and I find vlan_do_receive() is called for the
> incoming frames before passing SKB to hsr_handle_frame(). If someone
> can review this, it will help. Thanks.
>
> https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/CbRzXjwjR5/

hsr_handle_frame is an rx_handler called after
__netif_receive_skb_core called vlan_do_receive and jumped back to
another_round.

That's how it should work right?

Next message: Dmitry Osipenko: "Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] dt-bindings: mfd: Add ENE KB930 Embedded Controller binding"
Previous message: Cyril Hrubis: "Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2] syscall/ptrace08: Simplify the test."
In reply to: Murali Karicheri: "Re: [PATCH net-next 0/1] Support for VLAN interface over HSR/PRP"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]