The 02/17/2021 10:56, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 10:42:01PM +0100, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> > This patch extends the br_mrp_switchdev functions to be able to have a
> > better understanding what cause the issue and if the SW needs to be used
> > as a backup.
> >
> > There are the following cases:
> > - when the code is compiled without CONFIG_NET_SWITCHDEV. In this case
> > return success so the SW can continue with the protocol. Depending
> > on the function, it returns 0 or BR_MRP_SW.
> > - when code is compiled with CONFIG_NET_SWITCHDEV and the driver doesn't
> > implement any MRP callbacks. In this case the HW can't run MRP so it
> > just returns -EOPNOTSUPP. So the SW will stop further to configure the
> > node.
> > - when code is compiled with CONFIG_NET_SWITCHDEV and the driver fully
> > supports any MRP functionality. In this case the SW doesn't need to do
> > anything. The functions will return 0 or BR_MRP_HW.
> > - when code is compiled with CONFIG_NET_SWITCHDEV and the HW can't run
> > completely the protocol but it can help the SW to run it. For
> > example, the HW can't support completely MRM role(can't detect when it
> > stops receiving MRP Test frames) but it can redirect these frames to
> > CPU. In this case it is possible to have a SW fallback. The SW will
> > try initially to call the driver with sw_backup set to false, meaning
> > that the HW should implement completely the role. If the driver returns
> > -EOPNOTSUPP, the SW will try again with sw_backup set to false,
> > meaning that the SW will detect when it stops receiving the frames but
> > it needs HW support to redirect the frames to CPU. In case the driver
> > returns 0 then the SW will continue to configure the node accordingly.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > net/bridge/br_mrp_switchdev.c | 171 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> > net/bridge/br_private_mrp.h | 24 +++--
> > 2 files changed, 118 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/bridge/br_mrp_switchdev.c b/net/bridge/br_mrp_switchdev.c
> > index 3c9a4abcf4ee..cb54b324fa8c 100644
> > --- a/net/bridge/br_mrp_switchdev.c
> > +++ b/net/bridge/br_mrp_switchdev.c
> > @@ -4,6 +4,30 @@
> >
> > #include "br_private_mrp.h"
> >
> > +static enum br_mrp_hw_support
> > +br_mrp_switchdev_port_obj(struct net_bridge *br,
> > + const struct switchdev_obj *obj, bool add)
> > +{
> > + int err;
> > +
>
> Looks like you could have added this check here and simplified all the
> callers:
>
> if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NET_SWITCHDEV))
> return BR_MRP_SW;
Yes, good catch!
>
> > + if (add)
> > + err = switchdev_port_obj_add(br->dev, obj, NULL);
> > + else
> > + err = switchdev_port_obj_del(br->dev, obj);
> > +
> > + /* In case of success just return and notify the SW that doesn't need
> > + * to do anything
> > + */
> > + if (!err)
> > + return BR_MRP_HW;
> > +
> > + if (err != -EOPNOTSUPP)
> > + return BR_MRP_NONE;
> > +
> > + /* Continue with SW backup */
> > + return BR_MRP_SW;
> > +}
> > +
--
/Horatiu
