Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/3] net: ethernet: ti: Register the RPMsg driver as network device

From: Siddharth Vadapalli
Date: Sun Jun 02 2024 - 03:35:44 EST


On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 12:10:05PM +0530, Yojana Mallik wrote:
> Register the RPMsg driver as network device and add support for
> basic ethernet functionality by using the shared memory for data
> plane.
>
> The shared memory layout is as below, with the region between
> PKT_1_LEN to PKT_N modelled as circular buffer.
>
> -------------------------
> | HEAD |
> -------------------------
> | TAIL |
> -------------------------
> | PKT_1_LEN |
> | PKT_1 |
> -------------------------
> | PKT_2_LEN |
> | PKT_2 |
> -------------------------
> | . |
> | . |
> -------------------------
> | PKT_N_LEN |
> | PKT_N |
> -------------------------
>
> The offset between the HEAD and TAIL is polled to process the Rx packets.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yojana Mallik <y-mallik@xxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/ti/icve_rpmsg_common.h | 86 ++++
> drivers/net/ethernet/ti/inter_core_virt_eth.c | 453 +++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/net/ethernet/ti/inter_core_virt_eth.h | 35 +-
> 3 files changed, 570 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/icve_rpmsg_common.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/icve_rpmsg_common.h
> index 7cd157479d4d..2e3833de14bd 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/icve_rpmsg_common.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/icve_rpmsg_common.h
> @@ -15,14 +15,58 @@ enum icve_msg_type {
> ICVE_NOTIFY_MSG,
> };

[...]

>
> #endif /* __ICVE_RPMSG_COMMON_H__ */
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/inter_core_virt_eth.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/inter_core_virt_eth.c
> index bea822d2373a..d96547d317fe 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/inter_core_virt_eth.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/inter_core_virt_eth.c
> @@ -6,11 +6,145 @@
>
> #include "inter_core_virt_eth.h"

[...]

>
> +static int create_request(struct icve_common *common,
> + enum icve_rpmsg_type rpmsg_type)
> +{
> + struct message *msg = &common->send_msg;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + msg->msg_hdr.src_id = common->port->port_id;
> + msg->req_msg.type = rpmsg_type;
> +
> + switch (rpmsg_type) {
> + case ICVE_REQ_SHM_INFO:
> + msg->msg_hdr.msg_type = ICVE_REQUEST_MSG;
> + break;
> + case ICVE_REQ_SET_MAC_ADDR:
> + msg->msg_hdr.msg_type = ICVE_REQUEST_MSG;
> + ether_addr_copy(msg->req_msg.mac_addr.addr,
> + common->port->ndev->dev_addr);
> + break;
> + case ICVE_NOTIFY_PORT_UP:
> + case ICVE_NOTIFY_PORT_DOWN:
> + msg->msg_hdr.msg_type = ICVE_NOTIFY_MSG;
> + break;
> + default:
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + dev_err(common->dev, "Invalid RPMSG request\n");
> + };
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int icve_create_send_request(struct icve_common *common,
> + enum icve_rpmsg_type rpmsg_type,
> + bool wait)
> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (wait)
> + reinit_completion(&common->sync_msg);
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&common->send_msg_lock, flags);
> + create_request(common, rpmsg_type);

Why isn't the return value of create_request() being checked?
If it is guaranteed to always return 0 based on the design, convert it
to a void function.

> + rpmsg_send(common->rpdev->ept, (void *)(&common->send_msg),
> + sizeof(common->send_msg));
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->send_msg_lock, flags);
> +
> + if (wait) {
> + ret = wait_for_completion_timeout(&common->sync_msg,
> + ICVE_REQ_TIMEOUT);
> +
> + if (!ret) {
> + dev_err(common->dev, "Failed to receive response within %ld jiffies\n",
> + ICVE_REQ_TIMEOUT);
> + ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> + return ret;
> + }
> + }
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static void icve_state_machine(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> + struct delayed_work *dwork = to_delayed_work(work);
> + struct icve_common *common;
> + struct icve_port *port;
> +
> + common = container_of(dwork, struct icve_common, state_work);
> + port = common->port;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&common->state_lock);
> +
> + switch (common->state) {
> + case ICVE_STATE_PROBE:
> + break;
> + case ICVE_STATE_OPEN:
> + icve_create_send_request(common, ICVE_REQ_SHM_INFO, false);

The return value of icve_create_send_request() is not being checked. Is
it guaranteed to succeed? Where is the error handling path if
icve_create_send_request() fails?

> + break;
> + case ICVE_STATE_CLOSE:
> + break;
> + case ICVE_STATE_READY:
> + icve_create_send_request(common, ICVE_REQ_SET_MAC_ADDR, false);

Same here and at all other places where icve_create_send_request() is
being invoked. The icve_create_send_request() seems to be newly added in
this version of the series and wasn't there in the RFC patch. This should
be mentioned in the Changelog.

[...]

Regards,
Siddharth.