LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>, Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com>,
	"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@st.com>,
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 10/11] net: stmmac: Introduce selftests support
Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 08:25:14 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <78EB27739596EE489E55E81C33FEC33A0B47AB21@DE02WEMBXB.internal.synopsys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190509022330.GA23758@lunn.ch>

From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Date: Thu, May 09, 2019 at 03:23:30

> > +static int stmmac_test_eee(struct stmmac_priv *priv)
> > +{
> > +	struct stmmac_extra_stats *initial, *final;
> > +	int timeout = 100;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	ret = stmmac_test_loopback(priv);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		goto out_free_final;
> > +
> > +	/* We have no traffic in the line so, sooner or later it will go LPI */
> > +	while (--timeout) {
> > +		memcpy(final, &priv->xstats, sizeof(*final));
> > +
> > +		if (final->irq_tx_path_in_lpi_mode_n >
> > +		    initial->irq_tx_path_in_lpi_mode_n)
> > +			break;
> > +		msleep(100);
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	if (!timeout) {
> > +		ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> > +		goto out_free_final;
> > +	}
> 
> Retries would be a better name than timeout.

Ok.

> 
> Also, 100 * 100 ms seems like a long time.

Ah, yeah. I will adjust to 0.5 or maybe 1 sec max.

> 
> > +static int stmmac_filter_check(struct stmmac_priv *priv)
> > +{
> > +	if (!(priv->dev->flags & IFF_PROMISC))
> > +		return 0;
> > +
> > +	netdev_warn(priv->dev, "Test can't be run in promiscuous mode!\n");
> > +	return 1;
> 
> Maybe return EOPNOTSUPP here,

Ok.

> 
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int stmmac_test_hfilt(struct stmmac_priv *priv)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned char gd_addr[ETH_ALEN] = {0x01, 0x0c, 0xcd, 0x04, 0x00, 0x00};
> > +	unsigned char bd_addr[ETH_ALEN] = {0x06, 0x07, 0x08, 0x09, 0x0a, 0x0b};
> 
> What does gd and bd mean?

Good and Bad :D

> 
> > +	struct stmmac_packet_attrs attr = { };
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	if (stmmac_filter_check(priv))
> > +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> 
> and just return the error code from the call.
> 
> > +
> > +	ret = dev_mc_add(priv->dev, gd_addr);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return ret;
> > +
> > +	attr.dst = gd_addr;
> > +
> > +	/* Shall receive packet */
> > +	ret = __stmmac_test_loopback(priv, &attr);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		goto cleanup;
> > +
> > +	attr.dst = bd_addr;
> > +
> > +	/* Shall NOT receive packet */
> > +	ret = __stmmac_test_loopback(priv, &attr);
> > +	ret = !ret;
> 
> What is this test testing? gd is a multicast, where as bd is not.  I
> expect the hardware treats multicast different to unicast. So it would
> make more sense to test two different multicast addresses, one which
> has been added via dev_mc_addr, and one that has not?

Hmm, yeah makes sense. I will adjust.

> 
> > +
> > +cleanup:
> > +	dev_mc_del(priv->dev, gd_addr);
> > +	return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int stmmac_test_pfilt(struct stmmac_priv *priv)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned char gd_addr[ETH_ALEN] = {0x01, 0x02, 0x03, 0x04, 0x05, 0x06};
> > +	unsigned char bd_addr[ETH_ALEN] = {0x06, 0x07, 0x08, 0x09, 0x0a, 0x0b};
> > +	struct stmmac_packet_attrs attr = { };
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	if (stmmac_filter_check(priv))
> > +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +
> > +	ret = dev_uc_add(priv->dev, gd_addr);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return ret;
> > +
> > +	attr.dst = gd_addr;
> > +
> > +	/* Shall receive packet */
> > +	ret = __stmmac_test_loopback(priv, &attr);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		goto cleanup;
> 
> gb is a multicast address. Does dev_uc_add() return an error? If it
> does not we should not expect it to actually work, since a multicast
> address should not match a unicast address?

It doesn't return an error and it does calls the set_filter callback in 
netdev. I will adjust to use unicast address.

> You also seem to be missing a test for adding a unicast address via
> dev_uc_add() and receiving packets for that address, but not receiving
> multicast packets.

Hmm, what if interface was already configured to receive Multicast before 
running the tests ?

> 
> > +static const struct stmmac_test {
> > +	char name[ETH_GSTRING_LEN];
> > +	int lb;
> > +	int (*fn)(struct stmmac_priv *priv);
> > +} stmmac_selftests[] = {
> > +	{
> > +		.name = "MAC Loopback         ",
> > +		.lb = STMMAC_LOOPBACK_MAC,
> > +		.fn = stmmac_test_loopback,
> 
> stmmac_test_mac_loopback might be a better name.

Ok.

Thanks for the review!

Thanks,
Jose Miguel Abreu

  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-09  8:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-08  7:51 [PATCH net-next 00/11] net: stmmac: Selftests Jose Abreu
2019-05-08  7:51 ` [PATCH net-next 01/11] net: stmmac: Add MAC loopback callback to HWIF Jose Abreu
2019-05-08  7:51 ` [PATCH net-next 02/11] net: stmmac: dwmac100: Add MAC loopback support Jose Abreu
2019-05-08  7:51 ` [PATCH net-next 03/11] net: stmmac: dwmac1000: " Jose Abreu
2019-05-08  7:51 ` [PATCH net-next 04/11] net: stmmac: dwmac4/5: " Jose Abreu
2019-05-08  7:51 ` [PATCH net-next 05/11] net: stmmac: dwxgmac2: " Jose Abreu
2019-05-08  7:51 ` [PATCH net-next 06/11] net: stmmac: Switch MMC functions to HWIF callbacks Jose Abreu
2019-05-08  7:51 ` [PATCH net-next 07/11] net: stmmac: dwmac1000: Also pass control frames while in promisc mode Jose Abreu
2019-05-08 12:04   ` Andrew Lunn
2019-05-08 14:53     ` Jose Abreu
2019-05-08  7:51 ` [PATCH net-next 08/11] net: stmmac: dwmac4/5: " Jose Abreu
2019-05-08  7:51 ` [PATCH net-next 09/11] net: stmmac: dwxgmac2: " Jose Abreu
2019-05-08  7:51 ` [PATCH net-next 10/11] net: stmmac: Introduce selftests support Jose Abreu
2019-05-09  2:23   ` Andrew Lunn
2019-05-09  8:25     ` Jose Abreu [this message]
2019-05-09 12:21       ` Andrew Lunn
2019-05-09 15:11         ` Jose Abreu
2019-05-08  7:51 ` [PATCH net-next 11/11] net: stmmac: dwmac1000: Fix Hash Filter Jose Abreu
2019-05-08 15:46 ` [PATCH net-next 00/11] net: stmmac: Selftests David Miller
2019-05-08 19:50 ` Andrew Lunn
2019-05-09  8:17   ` Jose Abreu
2019-05-09 16:05     ` Jose Abreu
2019-05-09  9:04 ` Corentin Labbe
2019-05-09 10:11   ` Jose Abreu
2019-05-09 18:00     ` Corentin Labbe

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=78EB27739596EE489E55E81C33FEC33A0B47AB21@DE02WEMBXB.internal.synopsys.com \
    --to=jose.abreu@synopsys.com \
    --cc=Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com \
    --cc=alexandre.torgue@st.com \
    --cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peppe.cavallaro@st.com \
    --subject='RE: [PATCH net-next 10/11] net: stmmac: Introduce selftests support' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).