Hi Sergey, Thanks for the suggestion. > Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next v2 13/14] ravb: Update EMAC configuration > mode comment > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@xxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: 10 October 2021 10:49 > > To: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; David S. Miller > > <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@xxxxxx>; Geert Uytterhoeven > > <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>; Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; > > Adam Ford <aford173@xxxxxxxxx>; Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx>; Yuusuke > > Ashizuka <ashiduka@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Yoshihiro Shimoda > > <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@xxxxxxxxxxx>; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > linux-renesas- soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Chris Paterson > > <Chris.Paterson2@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Biju Das <biju.das@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; > > Prabhakar Mahadev Lad <prabhakar.mahadev- lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 13/14] ravb: Update EMAC configuration > > mode comment > > > > On 10.10.2021 12:37, Biju Das wrote: > > > Hi Sergey, > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@xxxxxxxxx> > > >> Sent: 10 October 2021 10:28 > > >> To: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; David S. Miller > > >> <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> > > >> Cc: Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@xxxxxx>; Geert Uytterhoeven > > >> <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>; Sergey Shtylyov > > >> <s.shtylyov@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Adam Ford <aford173@xxxxxxxxx>; Andrew > > >> Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx>; Yuusuke Ashizuka <ashiduka@xxxxxxxxxxx>; > > >> Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@xxxxxxxxxxx>; > > >> netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > >> linux-renesas- soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Chris Paterson > > >> <Chris.Paterson2@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Biju Das <biju.das@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; > > >> Prabhakar Mahadev Lad <prabhakar.mahadev- lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 13/14] ravb: Update EMAC > > >> configuration mode comment > > >> > > >> On 10.10.2021 10:29, Biju Das wrote: > > >> > > >>> Update EMAC configuration mode comment from "PAUSE prohibition" > > >>> to "EMAC Mode: PAUSE prohibition; Duplex; TX; RX; CRC Pass > > >>> Through; Promiscuous". > > >>> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > >>> Suggested-by: Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@xxxxxx> > > >>> --- > > >>> v1->v2: > > >>> * No change > > >>> V1: > > >>> * New patch. > > >>> --- > > >>> drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c | 2 +- > > >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > >>> > > >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c > > >>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c > > >>> index 9a770a05c017..b78aca235c37 100644 > > >>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c > > >>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c > > >>> @@ -519,7 +519,7 @@ static void ravb_emac_init_gbeth(struct > > >>> net_device > > >> *ndev) > > >>> /* Receive frame limit set register */ > > >>> ravb_write(ndev, GBETH_RX_BUFF_MAX + ETH_FCS_LEN, RFLR); > > >>> > > >>> - /* PAUSE prohibition */ > > >>> + /* EMAC Mode: PAUSE prohibition; Duplex; TX; RX; CRC Pass > > >>> +Through; Promiscuous */ > > >> > > >> Promiscuous mode, really? Why?! > > > > > > This is TOE related, > > I meant the context here is TOE register related. That is what I meant. > > > > > The promiscuous mode is supported by _all_ Ethernet controllers, I > > think. > > > > > and is recommendation from BSP team. > > > > On what grounds? > > The reference implementation has this on. Any way it is good catch. > I will turn it off and check. > > by looking at the RJ LED's there is not much activity and packet > statistics also show not much activity by default. > > How can we check, it is overloading the controller? So that I can compare > with and without this setting > > > > > > If you think it is wrong. > > > I can take this out. Please let me know. Currently the board is > > > booting > > and everything works without issues. > > > > Please do take it out. It'll needlessly overload the controller > > when there's much traffic on the local network. I have tested without this as well and I don't find any difference. So I plan to take this out. Do you have any idea how to check the "overloading the controller" with PRM bit ON/OFF to check the actual impact? Please let me know, so that I can compare the same. Regards, Biju > > > I can see much activity only on RJ45 LED's when I call tcpdump or by > setting IP link set eth0 promisc on. > Otherwise there is no traffic at all. > > Regards, > Biju > > > > > > The meaning of promiscuous in H/W manual as follows. > > > > I know what the promiscuous mode is. :-) > > It's needed by things like 'tcpdump' and normally shoild be off. > > > > > Promiscuous Mode > > > 1: All the frames except for PAUSE frame are received. > > > Self-addressed unicast, different address unicast, multicast, and > > > broadcast frames are all transferred to TOE. PAUSE frame reception > > > is controlled by PFR > > bit. > > > 0: Self-addressed unicast, multicast, and broadcast frames are > > > received, then transferred to TOE. > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Biju > > > > MBR, Sergey
