Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:2 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:2;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231027-fix-rtl8366rb-v1-1-d565d905535a@linaro.org>
 <95f324af-88de-4692-966f-588287305e09@gmail.com> <CACRpkdbyMEqjW1a9oK-GM2_XL0famH1RgSXW-fQLszn9t9UhWw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20231030125127.xccqwct3jgg6o2rl@skbuf>
In-Reply-To: <20231030125127.xccqwct3jgg6o2rl@skbuf>
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon, 30 Oct 2023 15:32:10 +0100
Message-ID: <CACRpkdbx2FGNPHa01O842MxH-LNfnKxRJN16a8oNm7zd1b65wg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dsa: tag_rtl4_a: Bump min packet size
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>,
        DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com>
Cc:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Hi Deng,

do you have some comments on the below, pertaining to
commit 9eb8bc593a5eed167dac2029abef343854c5ba75
"net: dsa: tag_rtl4_a: fix egress tags"?

I plan to test without the ZLEN padding and see what happens.
IIRC it wasn't working without that, but I may just misremember
the whole thing so let's rehash this.

On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 1:51=E2=80=AFPM Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>=
 wrote:

> What you are missing is that the existing padding done by rtl4a_tag_xmit(=
)
> shouldn't be normally needed except for exceptional cases.
>
> Socket buffers smaller than ETH_ZLEN can be passed to any network
> device, and it is expected that either the driver or the hardware pads
> up to ETH_ZLEN automatically. Thus, the conduit driver should already
> know that it needs to pad packets to ETH_ZLEN.
>
> The exceptional cases are:
> - This is a tail tag (not the case here), which by definition needs to
>   be located at the end of the skb. If you first put the tag then let
>   the conduit interface pad, then the tail tag is no longer at the tail.
>   So in that case, DSA pads first in generic code - dsa_user_xmit().
> - The switch must handle the case where, after stripping the DSA tag
>   from a ETH_ZLEN sized packet coming from the CPU port, it re-pads the
>   packet on user port egress. Some switches don't handle that properly,
>   and thus, we have isolated __skb_put_padto() calls within certain
>   tagging protocols which address just that case.
>
> So, what Florian was asking is whether the conduit interface is not
> doing its expected job properly. You clarified that the problem is big
> rather than small packets, but we still need an explanation for the
> existing __skb_put_padto() call, given that it seems that it was placed
> there due to a misunderstanding rather than due to an explicit need for
> an exceptional case.

Yours,
Linus Walleij