2023-02-16 12:29:47

by Horatiu Vultur

Subject: [PATCH net-next v2] net: lan966x: Use automatic selection of VCAP rule actionset

Since commit 81e164c4aec5 ("net: microchip: sparx5: Add automatic
selection of VCAP rule actionset") the VCAP API has the capability to
select automatically the actionset based on the actions that are attached
to the rule. So it is not needed anymore to hardcore the actionset in the
driver, therefore it is OK to remove this.

Signed-off-by: Horatiu Vultur <[email protected]>
---
v1->v2:
- improve the commit message by mentioning the commit which allows
to make this change
---
drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
index bd10a71897418..f960727ecaeec 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
@@ -261,8 +261,6 @@ static int lan966x_tc_flower_add(struct lan966x_port *port,
0);
err |= vcap_rule_add_action_u32(vrule, VCAP_AF_MASK_MODE,
LAN966X_PMM_REPLACE);
- err |= vcap_set_rule_set_actionset(vrule,
- VCAP_AFS_BASE_TYPE);
if (err)
goto out;

--
2.38.0

2023-02-16 14:12:50

by Larysa Zaremba

Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: lan966x: Use automatic selection of VCAP rule actionset

On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 01:29:07PM +0100, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> Since commit 81e164c4aec5 ("net: microchip: sparx5: Add automatic
> selection of VCAP rule actionset") the VCAP API has the capability to
> select automatically the actionset based on the actions that are attached
> to the rule. So it is not needed anymore to hardcore the actionset in the

I am sure, you've meant 'hardcode'

> driver, therefore it is OK to remove this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Horatiu Vultur <[email protected]>
> ---
> v1->v2:
> - improve the commit message by mentioning the commit which allows
> to make this change
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
> index bd10a71897418..f960727ecaeec 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
> @@ -261,8 +261,6 @@ static int lan966x_tc_flower_add(struct lan966x_port *port,
> 0);
> err |= vcap_rule_add_action_u32(vrule, VCAP_AF_MASK_MODE,
> LAN966X_PMM_REPLACE);
> - err |= vcap_set_rule_set_actionset(vrule,
> - VCAP_AFS_BASE_TYPE);

Is this the only location, where this can be done? I'm not very familiar with
this driver, would it maybe make sense to check out lan966x_ptp_add_trap() too?

> if (err)
> goto out;
>
> --
> 2.38.0
>

2023-02-17 08:09:07

by Horatiu Vultur

Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: lan966x: Use automatic selection of VCAP rule actionset

The 02/16/2023 14:54, Larysa Zaremba wrote:

Hi Larysa,

>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 01:29:07PM +0100, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> > Since commit 81e164c4aec5 ("net: microchip: sparx5: Add automatic
> > selection of VCAP rule actionset") the VCAP API has the capability to
> > select automatically the actionset based on the actions that are attached
> > to the rule. So it is not needed anymore to hardcore the actionset in the
>
> I am sure, you've meant 'hardcode'

Yes, I will change this in the next version.

>
> > driver, therefore it is OK to remove this.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Horatiu Vultur <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > v1->v2:
> > - improve the commit message by mentioning the commit which allows
> > to make this change
> > ---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c | 2 --
> > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
> > index bd10a71897418..f960727ecaeec 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
> > @@ -261,8 +261,6 @@ static int lan966x_tc_flower_add(struct lan966x_port *port,
> > 0);
> > err |= vcap_rule_add_action_u32(vrule, VCAP_AF_MASK_MODE,
> > LAN966X_PMM_REPLACE);
> > - err |= vcap_set_rule_set_actionset(vrule,
> > - VCAP_AFS_BASE_TYPE);
>
> Is this the only location, where this can be done? I'm not very familiar with
> this driver, would it maybe make sense to check out lan966x_ptp_add_trap() too?

Good catch! Also in lan966x_ptp_add_trap, the function
vcap_set_rule_set_actionset can be removed.

>
> > if (err)
> > goto out;
> >
> > --
> > 2.38.0
> >

--
/Horatiu