On 4/12/2023 10:00 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On 04/12, Song Yoong Siang wrote:
>> Add receive hardware timestamp metadata support via kfunc to XDP receive
>> packets.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Song Yoong Siang <yoong.siang.song@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h | 3 +++
>> .../net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++-
>> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h
>> index ac8ccf851708..826ac0ec88c6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h
>> @@ -94,6 +94,9 @@ struct stmmac_rx_buffer {
>>
>> struct stmmac_xdp_buff {
>> struct xdp_buff xdp;
>> + struct stmmac_priv *priv;
>> + struct dma_desc *p;
>> + struct dma_desc *np;
>> };
>>
>> struct stmmac_rx_queue {
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
>> index f7bbdf04d20c..ed660927b628 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
>> @@ -5315,10 +5315,15 @@ static int stmmac_rx(struct stmmac_priv *priv, int limit, u32 queue)
>>
>> xdp_init_buff(&ctx.xdp, buf_sz, &rx_q->xdp_rxq);
>> xdp_prepare_buff(&ctx.xdp, page_address(buf->page),
>> - buf->page_offset, buf1_len, false);
>> + buf->page_offset, buf1_len, true);
>>
>> pre_len = ctx.xdp.data_end - ctx.xdp.data_hard_start -
>> buf->page_offset;
>> +
>> + ctx.priv = priv;
>> + ctx.p = p;
>> + ctx.np = np;
>> +
>> skb = stmmac_xdp_run_prog(priv, &ctx.xdp);
>> /* Due xdp_adjust_tail: DMA sync for_device
>> * cover max len CPU touch
>> @@ -7071,6 +7076,23 @@ void stmmac_fpe_handshake(struct stmmac_priv *priv, bool enable)
>> }
>> }
>>
>> +static int stmmac_xdp_rx_timestamp(const struct xdp_md *_ctx, u64 *timestamp)
>> +{
>> + const struct stmmac_xdp_buff *ctx = (void *)_ctx;
>> +
>> + *timestamp = 0;
>> + stmmac_get_rx_hwtstamp(ctx->priv, ctx->p, ctx->np, timestamp);
>> +
>
> [..]
>
>> + if (*timestamp)
>
> Nit: does it make sense to change stmmac_get_rx_hwtstamp to return bool
> to indicate success/failure? Then you can do:
>
> if (!stmmac_get_rx_hwtstamp())
> reutrn -ENODATA;
I would make it return the -ENODATA directly since typically bool
true/false functions have names like "stmmac_has_rx_hwtstamp" or similar
name that infers you're answering a true/false question.
That might also let you avoid zeroing the timestamp value first?
Thanks,
Jake
