Hello Roger,
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 15:53:58 +0200
Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On J7 platforms, setting up multiple RX flows was failing
> as the RX free descriptor ring 0 is shared among all flows
> and we did not allocate enough elements in the RX free descriptor
> ring 0 to accommodate for all RX flows.
>
> This issue is not present on AM62 as separate pair of
> rings are used for free and completion rings for each flow.
>
> Fix this by allocating enough elements for RX free descriptor
> ring 0.
>
> However, we can no longer rely on desc_idx (descriptor based
> offsets) to identify the pages in the respective flows as
> free descriptor ring includes elements for all flows.
> To solve this, introduce a new swdata data structure to store
> flow_id and page. This can be used to identify which flow (page_pool)
> and page the descriptor belonged to when popped out of the
> RX rings.
[...]
> @@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ static int am65_cpsw_nuss_rx_push(struct am65_cpsw_common *common,
> struct device *dev = common->dev;
> dma_addr_t desc_dma;
> dma_addr_t buf_dma;
> - void *swdata;
> + struct am65_cpsw_swdata *swdata;
There's a reverse xmas-tree issue here, where variables should be
declared from the longest line to the shortest.
[...]
> static void am65_cpsw_nuss_rx_cleanup(void *data, dma_addr_t desc_dma)
> {
> - struct am65_cpsw_rx_flow *flow = data;
> + struct am65_cpsw_rx_chn *rx_chn = data;
> struct cppi5_host_desc_t *desc_rx;
> - struct am65_cpsw_rx_chn *rx_chn;
> + struct am65_cpsw_swdata *swdata;
> dma_addr_t buf_dma;
> u32 buf_dma_len;
> - void *page_addr;
> - void **swdata;
> - int desc_idx;
> + struct page *page;
> + u32 flow_id;
Here as well
[...]
> rx_chn->rx_chn = k3_udma_glue_request_rx_chn(dev, "rx", &rx_cfg);
> @@ -2455,10 +2441,12 @@ static int am65_cpsw_nuss_init_rx_chns(struct am65_cpsw_common *common)
> flow = &rx_chn->flows[i];
> flow->id = i;
> flow->common = common;
> + flow->irq = -EINVAL;
I've tried to follow the code and I don't get that assignment for the
irq field, does it really have to do with the current change or is it
another issue that's being fixed ?
Sorry if I missed the point here.
Thanks,
Maxime
