Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-39528-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 10:08:47 +0800
From: Furong Xu <0x1207@gmail.com>
To: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, Alexandre Torgue
 <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>, Jose Abreu <joabreu@synopsys.com>, Eric
 Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo
 Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
 Joao Pinto <jpinto@synopsys.com>, Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
 netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
 linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 xfr@outlook.com, rock.xu@nio.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: stmmac: xgmac: fix safety error descriptions
Message-ID: <20240126100847.0000370e@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4coefc2fqtc2eoereds3rf7vudci5l7ahme2wydocjepk2wrwy@ncgwl3j3koyu>
References: <20240123085037.939471-1-0x1207@gmail.com>
	<ii3muj3nmhuo6s5hm3g7wuiubtyzr632klrcesubtuaoyifogb@ohmunpxvdtsv>
	<20240125103454.0000312a@gmail.com>
	<4coefc2fqtc2eoereds3rf7vudci5l7ahme2wydocjepk2wrwy@ncgwl3j3koyu>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 16:48:23 +0300
Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 10:34:54AM +0800, Furong Xu wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 17:25:27 +0300
> > Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com> wrote:
> >   
> > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 04:50:37PM +0800, Furong Xu wrote:  
> > > > Commit 56e58d6c8a56 ("net: stmmac: Implement Safety Features in
> > > > XGMAC core") prints safety error descriptions when safety error assert,
> > > > but missed some special errors, and mixed correctable errors and
> > > > uncorrectable errors together.
> > > > This patch complete the error code list and print the type of errors.    
> > > 
> > > The XGMAC ECC Safety code has likely been just copied from the DW GMAC
> > > v5 (DW QoS Eth) part. So this change is partly relevant to that code too. I
> > > can't confirm that the special errors support is relevant to the DW
> > > QoS Eth too (it likely is though), so what about splitting this patch
> > > up into two:
> > > 1. Elaborate the errors description for DW GMAC v5 and DW XGMAC.
> > > 2. Add new ECC safety errors support.
> > > ?
> > > 
> > > On the other hand if we were sure that both DW QoS Eth and XGMAC
> > > safety features implementation match the ideal solution would be to
> > > refactor out the common code into a dedicated module.
> > > 
> > > -Serge(y)
> > >   
> >   
> 
> > Checked XGMAC Version 3.20a and DW QoS Eth Version 5.20a, the safety error
> > code definitions are not identical at all, they do have some differences,
> > about more than 20 bits of status register are different.
> > I think we should just leave them in individual implementations.  
> 
> For some reason you answered to the last part of my comment and
> completely ignored the first part which was the main point of my
> message.
> 
> Regarding the Safety Feature support implemented in QoS Eth and XGMAC
> STMMAC modules. You were wrong in using the statement "at all". Except
> the optional events enable/disable procedure introduced in the commit
> 5ac712dcdfef ("net: stmmac: enable platform specific safety
> features"), there aren't many differences: at least the errors
> handling and report are identical, MTL and DMA error flags match, even
> MTL and DMA ECC/Safety IRQ flags match. The only difference is in the
> MTL/MAC DPP (Data Parity Protection) part which can be easily factored
> out based on the device ID should we attempt to refactor the safety
> feature code. See the attached html-diff for more details of what
> match and what is different.
> 
> Anyway I am not insisting on the refactoring. That was just a
> proposal, a more preferred alternative to simultaneously patching two
> parts of the drivers looking very much alike. Such refactoring would
> improve the code maintainability. The main point of my comment was to
> extend your patch for DW QoS Eth safety feature implementation too
> since some of the changes you introduced were useful for it too, and
> in splitting the patch up since your patch added new flags support
> which was unrelated change.  Thus your patch would turned into the
> two-patches patchset like this:
> [Patch 1] would provide an elaborated errors description for both DW
> QOS Eth (GMAC v5.x) and DW XGMAC.
> [Patch 2] would introduce the new ECC safety errors support.
> 
> See my further comments about the respective changes.
> 
> >   
> > > > 
> > > > Fixes: 56e58d6c8a56 ("net: stmmac: Implement Safety Features in XGMAC core")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Furong Xu <0x1207@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  .../ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwxgmac2_core.c   | 36 +++++++++----------
> > > >  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwxgmac2_core.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwxgmac2_core.c
> > > > index eb48211d9b0e..ad812484059e 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwxgmac2_core.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwxgmac2_core.c
> > > > @@ -748,29 +748,29 @@ static void dwxgmac3_handle_mac_err(struct net_device *ndev,
> > > >  }
> > > >  
> > > >  static const struct dwxgmac3_error_desc dwxgmac3_mtl_errors[32]= {  
> 
> > > > -	{ true, "TXCES", "MTL TX Memory Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "TXCES", "MTL TX Memory Correctable Error" },  
> 
> Applicable for both IP-cores
> [Patch 1] +QoS, +XGMAC
> please apply this change to dwmac5.c too.
> 
> > > >  	{ true, "TXAMS", "MTL TX Memory Address Mismatch Error" },  
> 
> > > > -	{ true, "TXUES", "MTL TX Memory Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "TXUES", "MTL TX Memory Uncorrectable Error" },  
> 
> [Patch 1] +QoS, +XGMAC
> ditto
> 
> > > >  	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 3 */  
> 
> > > > -	{ true, "RXCES", "MTL RX Memory Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "RXCES", "MTL RX Memory Correctable Error" },  
> 
> [Patch 1] +QoS, +XGMAC
> ditto
> 
> > > >  	{ true, "RXAMS", "MTL RX Memory Address Mismatch Error" },  
> 
> > > > -	{ true, "RXUES", "MTL RX Memory Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "RXUES", "MTL RX Memory Uncorrectable Error" },  
> 
> [Patch 1] +QoS, +XGMAC
> ditto
> 
> > > >  	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 7 */  
> 
> > > > -	{ true, "ECES", "MTL EST Memory Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "ECES", "MTL EST Memory Correctable Error" },  
> 
> [Patch 1] +QoS, +XGMAC
> ditto
> 
> > > >  	{ true, "EAMS", "MTL EST Memory Address Mismatch Error" },  
> 
> > > > -	{ true, "EUES", "MTL EST Memory Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "EUES", "MTL EST Memory Uncorrectable Error" },  
> 
> [Patch 1] +QoS, +XGMAC
> ditto
> 
> > > >  	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 11 */  
> 
> > > > -	{ true, "RPCES", "MTL RX Parser Memory Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "RPCES", "MTL RX Parser Memory Correctable Error" },  
> 
> [Patch 1] +QoS, +XGMAC
> ditto
> 
> > > >  	{ true, "RPAMS", "MTL RX Parser Memory Address Mismatch Error" },  
> 
> > > > -	{ true, "RPUES", "MTL RX Parser Memory Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "RPUES", "MTL RX Parser Memory Uncorrectable Error" },  
> 
> [Patch 1] +QoS, +XGMAC
> ditto
> 
> > > >  	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 15 */  
> 
> > > > -	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 16 */
> > > > -	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 17 */
> > > > -	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 18 */
> > > > +	{ true, "SCES", "MTL SGF GCL Memory Correctable Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "SAMS", "MTL SGF GCL Memory Address Mismatch Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "SUES", "MTL SGF GCL Memory Uncorrectable Error" },
> > > >  	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 19 */
> > > > -	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 20 */
> > > > -	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 21 */
> > > > -	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 22 */
> > > > +	{ true, "RXFCES", "MTL RXF Memory Correctable Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "RXFAMS", "MTL RXF Memory Address Mismatch Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "RXFUES", "MTL RXF Memory Uncorrectable Error" },  
> 
> This introduces the new flags support. Please move this change into a
> separate patch (Patch 2):
> [Patch 2] +XGMAC only.
> 
> My DW QoS Eth v5.10a databook doesn't have these flags defined. If
> your 5.20a HW-manual have them described then please add them for DW
> QoS Eth too.
> 
> > > >  	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 23 */
> > > >  	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 24 */
> > > >  	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 25 */
> > > > @@ -796,13 +796,13 @@ static void dwxgmac3_handle_mtl_err(struct net_device *ndev,
> > > >  }
> > > >  
> > > >  static const struct dwxgmac3_error_desc dwxgmac3_dma_errors[32]= {  
> 
> > > > -	{ true, "TCES", "DMA TSO Memory Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "TCES", "DMA TSO Memory Correctable Error" },  
> 
> Applicable for both IP-cores
> [Patch 1] +QoS, +XGMAC
> please apply this change to dwmac5.c too.
> 
> > > >  	{ true, "TAMS", "DMA TSO Memory Address Mismatch Error" },  
> 
> > > > -	{ true, "TUES", "DMA TSO Memory Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "TUES", "DMA TSO Memory Uncorrectable Error" },  
> 
> [Patch 1] +QoS, +XGMAC
> ditto
> 
> > > >  	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 3 */  
> 
> > > > -	{ true, "DCES", "DMA DCACHE Memory Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "DCES", "DMA DCACHE Memory Correctable Error" },
> > > >  	{ true, "DAMS", "DMA DCACHE Address Mismatch Error" },
> > > > -	{ true, "DUES", "DMA DCACHE Memory Error" },
> > > > +	{ true, "DUES", "DMA DCACHE Memory Uncorrectable Error" },  
> 
> AFAICS applicable for XGMAC only
> [Patch 1] +XGMAC only.
> Once again, My DW QoS Eth v5.10a databook doesn't have these flags
> defined. So if your DW QoS Eth 5.20a HW-manual do have them described
> please add them for DW QoS Eth with the elaborated description in the
> framework of the Patch 2.
> 
> -Serge(y)
> 
> > > >  	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 7 */
> > > >  	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 8 */
> > > >  	{ false, "UNKNOWN", "Unknown Error" }, /* 9 */
> > > > -- 
> > > > 2.34.1
> > > > 
> > > >     
> >   

Hi Serge:
Thanks for your detailed explanation, new refactoring will be sent to net-next.