Hi Serge,
takan care of all commnets in V7 . Please review
Thanks
Suraj
On 12/18/2023 4:18 PM, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 03:27:54PM +0530, Suraj Jaiswal wrote:
>>
>> Hi Serge,
>> Please find commnet inline & let me know if any further action needed
>>
>> Thanks
>> Suraj
>>
>> On 12/14/2023 8:42 PM, Serge Semin wrote:
>>> Hi Suraj
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 05:28:41PM +0530, Suraj Jaiswal wrote:
>>>> Add support to listen HW safety IRQ like ECC(error
>>>> correction code), DPP(data path parity), FSM(finite state
>>>> machine) fault in common IRQ line.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Suraj Jaiswal <quic_jsuraj@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/common.h | 1 +
>>>> drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h | 3 +++
>>>> .../net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>> .../ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_platform.c | 9 ++++++++
>>>> 4 files changed, 34 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/common.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/common.h
>>>> index 721c1f8e892f..b9233b09b80f 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/common.h
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/common.h
>>>> @@ -344,6 +344,7 @@ enum request_irq_err {
>>>> REQ_IRQ_ERR_ALL,
>>>> REQ_IRQ_ERR_TX,
>>>> REQ_IRQ_ERR_RX,
>>>> + REQ_IRQ_ERR_SFTY,
>>>> REQ_IRQ_ERR_SFTY_UE,
>>>> REQ_IRQ_ERR_SFTY_CE,
>>>> REQ_IRQ_ERR_LPI,
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h
>>>> index 9f89acf31050..ca3d93851bed 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h
>>>> @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ struct stmmac_resources {
>>>> int wol_irq;
>>>> int lpi_irq;
>>>> int irq;
>>>> + int sfty_irq;
>>>> int sfty_ce_irq;
>>>> int sfty_ue_irq;
>>>> int rx_irq[MTL_MAX_RX_QUEUES];
>>>> @@ -297,6 +298,7 @@ struct stmmac_priv {
>>>> void __iomem *ptpaddr;
>>>> void __iomem *estaddr;
>>>> unsigned long active_vlans[BITS_TO_LONGS(VLAN_N_VID)];
>>>> + int sfty_irq;
>>>> int sfty_ce_irq;
>>>> int sfty_ue_irq;
>>>> int rx_irq[MTL_MAX_RX_QUEUES];
>>>> @@ -305,6 +307,7 @@ struct stmmac_priv {
>>>> char int_name_mac[IFNAMSIZ + 9];
>>>> char int_name_wol[IFNAMSIZ + 9];
>>>> char int_name_lpi[IFNAMSIZ + 9];
>>>> + char int_name_sfty[IFNAMSIZ + 10];
>>>> char int_name_sfty_ce[IFNAMSIZ + 10];
>>>> char int_name_sfty_ue[IFNAMSIZ + 10];
>>>> char int_name_rx_irq[MTL_MAX_TX_QUEUES][IFNAMSIZ + 14];
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
>>>> index 47de466e432c..6cf289f192a7 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
>>>> @@ -3592,6 +3592,10 @@ static void stmmac_free_irq(struct net_device *dev,
>>>> if (priv->wol_irq > 0 && priv->wol_irq != dev->irq)
>>>> free_irq(priv->wol_irq, dev);
>>>> fallthrough;
>>>> + case REQ_IRQ_ERR_SFTY:
>>>> + if (priv->sfty_irq > 0 && priv->sfty_irq != dev->irq)
>>>> + free_irq(priv->sfty_irq, dev);
>>>> + fallthrough;
>>>> case REQ_IRQ_ERR_WOL:
>>>> free_irq(dev->irq, dev);
>>>> fallthrough;
>>>> @@ -3759,6 +3763,7 @@ static int stmmac_request_irq_single(struct net_device *dev)
>>>> struct stmmac_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
>>>> enum request_irq_err irq_err;
>>>> int ret;
>>>
>>>> + char *int_name;
>>>
>>> See my comment below.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> ret = request_irq(dev->irq, stmmac_interrupt,
>>>> IRQF_SHARED, dev->name, dev);
>>>> @@ -3798,6 +3803,20 @@ static int stmmac_request_irq_single(struct net_device *dev)
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>
>>>> + if (priv->sfty_irq > 0 && priv->sfty_irq != dev->irq) {
>>>> + int_name = priv->int_name_sfty;
>>>> + sprintf(int_name, "%s:%s", dev->name, "safety");
>>>> + ret = request_irq(priv->sfty_irq, stmmac_safety_interrupt,
>>>> + 0, int_name, dev);
>>>> + if (unlikely(ret < 0)) {
>>>> + netdev_err(priv->dev,
>>>> + "%s: alloc safety failed %d (error: %d)\n",
>>>> + __func__, priv->sfty_irq, ret);
>>>> + irq_err = REQ_IRQ_ERR_SFTY;
>>>> + goto irq_error;
>>>> + }
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>
>
>>> Omg, I thought this change belonged to stmmac_request_irq_multi_msi().
>>> My bad, sorry. Please move the code above to
>>> stmmac_request_irq_multi_msi() and get back the part in
>>> stmmac_request_irq_single() as it was in v5,
>
> Please note my comment regarding the common safety IRQ being supported
> in both stmmac_request_irq_single() and stmmac_request_irq_multi_msi()
> methods.
>
>> but instead of specifying
>>> "safety" IRQ name use "dev->name" as the rest of similar code snippets
>>> in here have:
>>>
>>> + if (priv->sfty_irq > 0 && priv->sfty_irq != dev->irq) {
>>> + ret = request_irq(priv->sfty_irq, stmmac_safety_interrupt,
>>> + 0, dev->name, dev);
>>> + if (unlikely(ret < 0)) {
>>> + netdev_err(priv->dev,
>>> + "%s: alloc safety failed %d (error: %d)\n",
>>> + __func__, priv->sfty_irq, ret);
>>> + irq_err = REQ_IRQ_ERR_SFTY;
>>> + goto irq_error;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>
>
>> <Suraj> We can not use "dev->name" as this is name already used by "stmmac_interrupt" @ https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.1.68/source/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c#L3655.
>
> It's not that much of the problem. The main idea is to convert your
> solution to following the _local_ coding convention. See, the rest of
> the IRQs in stmmac_request_irq_single() are requested with "dev->name"
> being specified as the IRQ name (irrespective to having such solution
> being not that correct). That's what I was talking about. If you want
> the safety IRQ to have an unique name, then please submit this patch
> as I suggested above and _then_, on top of it, add a new patch which
> would convert the entire stmmac_request_irq_single() method to
> creating all IRQ names as it's, for instance, done in
> stmmac_request_irq_multi_msi().
>
>> <
>> ret = request_irq(dev->irq, stmmac_interrupt,
>> IRQF_SHARED, dev->name, dev);
>>>
>
>> if we are using same "dev->name" while requesting safety IRQ as well then "/proc/interrupt" will show same name eth0/eth1 for both "stmmac_interrupt" & "safety interrupt" and by looking at "/proc/interrupt" output we can not say which IRQ is for safety and which is for stmmac_interrupt.
>
> Thanks. I am perfectly aware of that. Please see my comment above.
>
>>>
>>> I guess at some point afterwards we'll need to refactor the IRQs
>>> request part of this driver: replace stmmac_request_irq_single() body
>>> with the upper part of the stmmac_request_irq_multi_msi() method and
>>> then just make the former method being called from the later one...
>>>
>>>> return 0;
>>>>
>>>> irq_error:
>>>> @@ -7462,8 +7481,10 @@ int stmmac_dvr_probe(struct device *device,
>>>> priv->dev->irq = res->irq;
>>>> priv->wol_irq = res->wol_irq;
>>>> priv->lpi_irq = res->lpi_irq;
>>>> + priv->sfty_irq = res->sfty_irq;
>>>> priv->sfty_ce_irq = res->sfty_ce_irq;
>>>> priv->sfty_ue_irq = res->sfty_ue_irq;
>>>
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Please drop this change. The code below is attached to the code above
>>> because it basically does the same but in the loop.
>
>> <Suraj> below loop code "for (i = 0; i < MTL_MAX_RX_QUEUES; i++) priv->rx_irq[i] = res->rx_irq[i];" is not for rx_irq array and will not help for safety irq.
>> Let me know if I got your commnet properly .
>
> Sorry, you didn't. My comment concerned the _empty_ line you placed
> between the code above and below. You shouldn't have done that.
>
>>>
>>>> for (i = 0; i < MTL_MAX_RX_QUEUES; i++)
>>>> priv->rx_irq[i] = res->rx_irq[i];
>>>> for (i = 0; i < MTL_MAX_TX_QUEUES; i++)
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_platform.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_platform.c
>>>> index 1ffde555da47..3808a3225a7d 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_platform.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_platform.c
>>>> @@ -726,6 +726,15 @@ int stmmac_get_platform_resources(struct platform_device *pdev,
>>>> dev_info(&pdev->dev, "IRQ eth_lpi not found\n");
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> + stmmac_res->sfty_irq =
>>>> + platform_get_irq_byname_optional(pdev, "sfty");
>>>
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Please drop this change too. It's normal to have a method call
>>> attached to the error check statement especially seeing the rest of
>>> the similar code snippets are designed that way in this function.
>
>> <Suraj> Do you means to remove all below code where we are printing the dev_info() message ?
>
> No. I was referring to the _empty_ line between the method above and
> the error check code below. It's pointless and at the very least
> breaks the local coding convention.
>
> -Serge(y)
>
>> We added this code similar to LPM code.
>>>
>>> -Serge(y)
>>>
>>>> + if (stmmac_res->sfty_irq < 0) {
>>>> + if (stmmac_res->sfty_irq == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>> + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>> + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "IRQ safety IRQ not found\n");
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> stmmac_res->addr = devm_platform_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0);
>>>>
>>>> return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(stmmac_res->addr);
>>>> --
>>>> 2.25.1
>>>>
>>>>
