2022-01-28 20:14:14

by Richard Cochran

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/7] net: lan966x: Implement SIOCSHWTSTAMP and SIOCGHWTSTAMP

On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 11:23:30AM +0100, Horatiu Vultur wrote:

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_ptp.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_ptp.c
> index 69d8f43e2b1b..9ff4d3fca5a1 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_ptp.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_ptp.c
> @@ -35,6 +35,90 @@ static u64 lan966x_ptp_get_nominal_value(void)
> return res;
> }
>
> +int lan966x_ptp_hwtstamp_set(struct lan966x_port *port, struct ifreq *ifr)
> +{
> + struct lan966x *lan966x = port->lan966x;
> + bool l2 = false, l4 = false;
> + struct hwtstamp_config cfg;
> + struct lan966x_phc *phc;
> +
> + /* For now don't allow to run ptp on ports that are part of a bridge,
> + * because in case of transparent clock the HW will still forward the
> + * frames, so there would be duplicate frames
> + */
> + if (lan966x->bridge_mask & BIT(port->chip_port))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (copy_from_user(&cfg, ifr->ifr_data, sizeof(cfg)))
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + switch (cfg.tx_type) {
> + case HWTSTAMP_TX_ON:
> + port->ptp_cmd = IFH_REW_OP_TWO_STEP_PTP;
> + break;
> + case HWTSTAMP_TX_ONESTEP_SYNC:
> + port->ptp_cmd = IFH_REW_OP_ONE_STEP_PTP;
> + break;
> + case HWTSTAMP_TX_OFF:
> + port->ptp_cmd = IFH_REW_OP_NOOP;
> + break;
> + default:
> + return -ERANGE;
> + }
> +
> + mutex_lock(&lan966x->ptp_lock);

No need to lock stack variables. Move locking down to ...

> + switch (cfg.rx_filter) {
> + case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_NONE:
> + break;
> + case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L4_EVENT:
> + case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L4_SYNC:
> + case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L4_DELAY_REQ:
> + l4 = true;
> + break;
> + case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L2_EVENT:
> + case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L2_SYNC:
> + case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L2_DELAY_REQ:
> + l2 = true;
> + break;
> + case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_EVENT:
> + case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_SYNC:
> + case HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_DELAY_REQ:
> + l2 = true;
> + l4 = true;
> + break;
> + default:
> + mutex_unlock(&lan966x->ptp_lock);
> + return -ERANGE;
> + }
> +
> + if (l2 && l4)
> + cfg.rx_filter = HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_EVENT;
> + else if (l2)
> + cfg.rx_filter = HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L2_EVENT;
> + else if (l4)
> + cfg.rx_filter = HWTSTAMP_FILTER_PTP_V2_L4_EVENT;
> + else
> + cfg.rx_filter = HWTSTAMP_FILTER_NONE;
> +
> + /* Commit back the result & save it */

... here

> + phc = &lan966x->phc[LAN966X_PHC_PORT];
> + memcpy(&phc->hwtstamp_config, &cfg, sizeof(cfg));
> + mutex_unlock(&lan966x->ptp_lock);
> +
> + return copy_to_user(ifr->ifr_data, &cfg, sizeof(cfg)) ? -EFAULT : 0;
> +}

Thanks,
Richard