RE: [PATCH net] net: dsa: microchip: fix KSZ9477 set_ageing_time function
From: Tristram.Ha
Date: Thu May 30 2024 - 19:07:00 EST
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: microchip: fix KSZ9477 set_ageing_time function
>
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content
> is safe
>
> On Tue, 2024-05-28 at 14:36 -0700, Tristram.Ha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: Tristram Ha <tristram.ha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > The aging count is not a simple 11-bit value but comprises a 3-bit
> > multiplier and an 8-bit second count. The code tries to find a set of
> > values with result close to the specifying value.
> >
> > Note LAN937X has similar operation but provides an option to use
> > millisecond instead of second so there will be a separate fix in the
> > future.
> >
> > Fixes: 2c119d9982b1 ("net: dsa: microchip: add the support for set_ageing_time")
> > Signed-off-by: Tristram Ha <tristram.ha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz9477.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++----
> > drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz9477_reg.h | 1 -
> > 2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz9477.c
> b/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz9477.c
> > index f8ad7833f5d9..1af11aee3119 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz9477.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz9477.c
> > @@ -1099,26 +1099,70 @@ void ksz9477_get_caps(struct ksz_device *dev, int
> port,
> > int ksz9477_set_ageing_time(struct ksz_device *dev, unsigned int msecs)
> > {
> > u32 secs = msecs / 1000;
> > + u8 first, last, mult, i;
> > + int min, ret;
> > + int diff[8];
> > u8 value;
> > u8 data;
> > - int ret;
> >
> > - value = FIELD_GET(SW_AGE_PERIOD_7_0_M, secs);
> > + /* The aging timer comprises a 3-bit multiplier and an 8-bit second
> > + * value. Either of them cannot be zero. The maximum timer is then
> > + * 7 * 255 = 1785.
> > + */
> > + if (!secs)
> > + secs = 1;
> >
> > - ret = ksz_write8(dev, REG_SW_LUE_CTRL_3, value);
> > + ret = ksz_read8(dev, REG_SW_LUE_CTRL_0, &value);
> > if (ret < 0)
> > return ret;
> >
> > - data = FIELD_GET(SW_AGE_PERIOD_10_8_M, secs);
> > + /* Check whether there is need to update the multiplier. */
> > + mult = FIELD_GET(SW_AGE_CNT_M, value);
> > + if (mult > 0) {
> > + /* Try to use the same multiplier already in the register. */
> > + min = secs / mult;
> > + if (min <= 0xff && min * mult == secs)
> > + return ksz_write8(dev, REG_SW_LUE_CTRL_3, min);
> > + }
> >
> > - ret = ksz_read8(dev, REG_SW_LUE_CTRL_0, &value);
> > - if (ret < 0)
> > - return ret;
> > + /* Return error if too large. */
> > + if (secs > 7 * 0xff)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + /* Find out which combination of multiplier * value results in a timer
> > + * value close to the specified timer value.
> > + */
> > + first = (secs + 0xfe) / 0xff;
> > + for (i = first; i <= 7; i++) {
> > + min = secs / i;
> > + diff[i] = secs - i * min;
> > + if (!diff[i]) {
> > + i++;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + last = i;
> > + min = 0xff;
> > + for (i = last - 1; i >= first; i--) {
> > + if (diff[i] < min) {
> > + data = i;
> > + min = diff[i];
> > + }
> > + if (!min)
> > + break;
> > + }
>
> Is the additional accuracy worthy the added complexity WRT:
>
> mult = DIV_ROUND_UP(secs, 0xff);
>
> ?
I do not know much accuracy is expected of this function. I do not know
whether users can easily specify the amount, but the default is 3 seconds
which is the same as the hardware default where the multiplier is 4 and
the count is 75. So most of the time the rest of the code will not be
executed.