hi
Now frame padding in TI TI CPSW/EMAC is implemented in a bit of entangled way as
frame SKB padded in drivers (without skb->len) while frame length fixed in CPDMA.
Things became even more confusing hence CPSW switcdev driver need to perform min
TX frame length correction in switch mode [1].
To avoid further confusion, make xmit path more clear and linear, and avoid
updating CPDMA configuration interface for min TX frame length correction
(which is not CPDMA job in general) this series switches TI CPSW/EMAC
drivers to skb_put_padto() instead of skb_padto() in their xmit path, so
skb->len also got updated properly and then removes TX frame length
fixup from CPDMA code.
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/[email protected]/
Grygorii Strashko (3):
net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: switch to use skb_put_padto()
net: ethernet: ti: davinci_emac: switch to use skb_put_padto()
net: ethernet: ti: davinci_cpdma: drop frame padding
drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c | 2 +-
drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw_priv.c | 1 -
drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_cpdma.c | 5 -----
drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_cpdma.h | 1 -
drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_emac.c | 3 +--
5 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
--
2.17.1
Hence all users of davinci_cpdma switched to skb_put_padto() the frame
padding can be removed from it.
Signed-off-by: Grygorii Strashko <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw_priv.c | 1 -
drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_cpdma.c | 5 -----
drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_cpdma.h | 1 -
drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_emac.c | 1 -
4 files changed, 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw_priv.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw_priv.c
index ecc2a6b7e28f..d97a72c9ec53 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw_priv.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw_priv.c
@@ -518,7 +518,6 @@ int cpsw_init_common(struct cpsw_common *cpsw, void __iomem *ss_regs,
dma_params.num_chan = data->channels;
dma_params.has_soft_reset = true;
- dma_params.min_packet_size = CPSW_MIN_PACKET_SIZE;
dma_params.desc_mem_size = data->bd_ram_size;
dma_params.desc_align = 16;
dma_params.has_ext_regs = true;
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_cpdma.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_cpdma.c
index d2eab5cd1e0c..753d94c9915a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_cpdma.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_cpdma.c
@@ -1034,11 +1034,6 @@ static int cpdma_chan_submit_si(struct submit_info *si)
return -ENOMEM;
}
- if (len < ctlr->params.min_packet_size) {
- len = ctlr->params.min_packet_size;
- chan->stats.runt_transmit_buff++;
- }
-
mode = CPDMA_DESC_OWNER | CPDMA_DESC_SOP | CPDMA_DESC_EOP;
cpdma_desc_to_port(chan, mode, si->directed);
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_cpdma.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_cpdma.h
index d3cfe234d16a..62151f13c7ce 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_cpdma.h
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_cpdma.h
@@ -26,7 +26,6 @@ struct cpdma_params {
void __iomem *rxthresh, *rxfree;
int num_chan;
bool has_soft_reset;
- int min_packet_size;
dma_addr_t desc_mem_phys;
dma_addr_t desc_hw_addr;
int desc_mem_size;
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_emac.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_emac.c
index b1c5cbe7478b..cd2ef0282f38 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_emac.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/davinci_emac.c
@@ -1850,7 +1850,6 @@ static int davinci_emac_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
dma_params.txcp = priv->emac_base + 0x640;
dma_params.rxcp = priv->emac_base + 0x660;
dma_params.num_chan = EMAC_MAX_TXRX_CHANNELS;
- dma_params.min_packet_size = EMAC_DEF_MIN_ETHPKTSIZE;
dma_params.desc_hw_addr = hw_ram_addr;
dma_params.desc_mem_size = pdata->ctrl_ram_size;
dma_params.desc_align = 16;
--
2.17.1
Hello:
This series was applied to netdev/net-next.git (refs/heads/master):
On Thu, 5 Aug 2021 17:55:52 +0300 you wrote:
> hi
>
> Now frame padding in TI TI CPSW/EMAC is implemented in a bit of entangled way as
> frame SKB padded in drivers (without skb->len) while frame length fixed in CPDMA.
> Things became even more confusing hence CPSW switcdev driver need to perform min
> TX frame length correction in switch mode [1].
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- [net-next,1/3] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: switch to use skb_put_padto()
https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/1f88d5d566b8
- [net-next,2/3] net: ethernet: ti: davinci_emac: switch to use skb_put_padto()
https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/61e7a22da75b
- [net-next,3/3] net: ethernet: ti: davinci_cpdma: drop frame padding
https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/9ffc513f95ee
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
hi Jakub, David,
On 06/08/2021 12:30, [email protected] wrote:
> Hello:
>
> This series was applied to netdev/net-next.git (refs/heads/master):
>
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2021 17:55:52 +0300 you wrote:
>> hi
>>
>> Now frame padding in TI TI CPSW/EMAC is implemented in a bit of entangled way as
>> frame SKB padded in drivers (without skb->len) while frame length fixed in CPDMA.
>> Things became even more confusing hence CPSW switcdev driver need to perform min
>> TX frame length correction in switch mode [1].
>>
>> [...]
>
> Here is the summary with links:
> - [net-next,1/3] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: switch to use skb_put_padto()
> https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/1f88d5d566b8
> - [net-next,2/3] net: ethernet: ti: davinci_emac: switch to use skb_put_padto()
> https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/61e7a22da75b
> - [net-next,3/3] net: ethernet: ti: davinci_cpdma: drop frame padding
> https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/9ffc513f95ee
I'm terribly sorry for the mess here - this series depends from patch
"net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix min eth packet size for non-switch use-cases" [1]
Not sure what I've being thinking about I've had to note it or include in this series :(
I'm very sorry again - can it be dropped?
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/[email protected]/
--
Best regards,
grygorii
From: Grygorii Strashko <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2021 13:00:30 +0300
>
> I'm very sorry again - can it be dropped?
Easiest is for you to send a fixup or a revert to the list, thanks.
On 06/08/2021 13:04, David Miller wrote:
> From: Grygorii Strashko <[email protected]>
> Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2021 13:00:30 +0300
>
>>
>> I'm very sorry again - can it be dropped?
>
> Easiest is for you to send a fixup or a revert to the list, thanks.
>
>
Only Patch 3 need to be reverted - i'll send revert. Thank you.
--
Best regards,
grygorii