[PATCH 0/2] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix susp/resume

[PATCH 0/2] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix susp/resume

[Ivan Khoronzhuk]

These two patches fix suspend/resume chain.

Ivan Khoronzhuk (2):
  net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix cpsw assignment in resume
  net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix resume because of usage count

 drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c | 44 +++++++++++++-----------------------------
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)

-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH 1/2] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix cpsw assignment in resume

[Ivan Khoronzhuk]

There is a copy-paste error, which hides breaking of resume
for CPSW driver: there was replaced netdev_priv() to ndev_to_cpsw(ndev)
in suspend, but left it unchanged in resume.

Fixes: 606f39939595a4d4540406bfc11f265b2036af6d
(ti: cpsw: move platform data and slaves info to cpsw_common)

Reported-by: Alexey Starikovskiy <AStarikovskiy@topcon.com>
Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
index 4d1c0c3..9714fab 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
@@ -3225,7 +3225,7 @@ static int cpsw_resume(struct device *dev)
 {
 	struct platform_device	*pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
 	struct net_device	*ndev = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
-	struct cpsw_common	*cpsw = netdev_priv(ndev);
+	struct cpsw_common	*cpsw = ndev_to_cpsw(ndev);
 
 	/* Select default pin state */
 	pinctrl_pm_select_default_state(dev);
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH 2/2] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix resume because of usage count

[Ivan Khoronzhuk]

The usage count function is based on ndev_running flag that is
updated before calling ndo_open/close, but if ndo is called in
another place, in this case in suspend/resume, the counter is not
changed, that breaks sus/resume. For common resource no difference
which device is using it, does matter only device count. So, replace
usage count function on var and inc and dec it in ndo_open/close.

Fixes: 03fd01ad0eead23eb79294b6fb4d71dcac493855
"net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: don't duplicate ndev_running"

Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c | 42 ++++++++++++------------------------------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
index 9714fab..1ffaad1 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
@@ -399,6 +399,7 @@ struct cpsw_common {
 	struct cpts			*cpts;
 	int				rx_ch_num, tx_ch_num;
 	int				speed;
+	int				usage_count;
 };
 
 struct cpsw_priv {
@@ -671,18 +672,6 @@ static void cpsw_intr_disable(struct cpsw_common *cpsw)
 	return;
 }
 
-static int cpsw_get_usage_count(struct cpsw_common *cpsw)
-{
-	u32 i;
-	u32 usage_count = 0;
-
-	for (i = 0; i < cpsw->data.slaves; i++)
-		if (cpsw->slaves[i].ndev && netif_running(cpsw->slaves[i].ndev))
-			usage_count++;
-
-	return usage_count;
-}
-
 static void cpsw_tx_handler(void *token, int len, int status)
 {
 	struct netdev_queue	*txq;
@@ -716,8 +705,7 @@ static void cpsw_rx_handler(void *token, int len, int status)
 
 	if (unlikely(status < 0) || unlikely(!netif_running(ndev))) {
 		/* In dual emac mode check for all interfaces */
-		if (cpsw->data.dual_emac &&
-		    cpsw_get_usage_count(cpsw) &&
+		if (cpsw->data.dual_emac && cpsw->usage_count &&
 		    (status >= 0)) {
 			/* The packet received is for the interface which
 			 * is already down and the other interface is up
@@ -1492,11 +1480,8 @@ static int cpsw_ndo_open(struct net_device *ndev)
 		 CPSW_MAJOR_VERSION(reg), CPSW_MINOR_VERSION(reg),
 		 CPSW_RTL_VERSION(reg));
 
-	/* Initialize host and slave ports.
-	 * Given ndev is marked as opened already, so init port only if 1 ndev
-	 * is opened
-	 */
-	if (cpsw_get_usage_count(cpsw) < 2)
+	/* Initialize host and slave ports */
+	if (!cpsw->usage_count)
 		cpsw_init_host_port(priv);
 	for_each_slave(priv, cpsw_slave_open, priv);
 
@@ -1507,10 +1492,8 @@ static int cpsw_ndo_open(struct net_device *ndev)
 		cpsw_ale_add_vlan(cpsw->ale, cpsw->data.default_vlan,
 				  ALE_ALL_PORTS, ALE_ALL_PORTS, 0, 0);
 
-	/* Given ndev is marked as opened already, so if more ndev
-	 * are opened - no need to init shared resources.
-	 */
-	if (cpsw_get_usage_count(cpsw) < 2) {
+	/* initialize shared resources for every ndev */
+	if (!cpsw->usage_count) {
 		/* disable priority elevation */
 		__raw_writel(0, &cpsw->regs->ptype);
 
@@ -1552,6 +1535,7 @@ static int cpsw_ndo_open(struct net_device *ndev)
 
 	cpdma_ctlr_start(cpsw->dma);
 	cpsw_intr_enable(cpsw);
+	cpsw->usage_count++;
 
 	return 0;
 
@@ -1572,10 +1556,7 @@ static int cpsw_ndo_stop(struct net_device *ndev)
 	netif_tx_stop_all_queues(priv->ndev);
 	netif_carrier_off(priv->ndev);
 
-	/* Given ndev is marked as close already,
-	 * so disable shared resources if no open devices
-	 */
-	if (!cpsw_get_usage_count(cpsw)) {
+	if (cpsw->usage_count <= 1) {
 		napi_disable(&cpsw->napi_rx);
 		napi_disable(&cpsw->napi_tx);
 		cpts_unregister(cpsw->cpts);
@@ -1588,6 +1569,7 @@ static int cpsw_ndo_stop(struct net_device *ndev)
 	if (cpsw_need_resplit(cpsw))
 		cpsw_split_res(ndev);
 
+	cpsw->usage_count--;
 	pm_runtime_put_sync(cpsw->dev);
 	return 0;
 }
@@ -2393,7 +2375,7 @@ static int cpsw_resume_data_pass(struct net_device *ndev)
 			netif_dormant_off(slave->ndev);
 
 	/* After this receive is started */
-	if (cpsw_get_usage_count(cpsw)) {
+	if (cpsw->usage_count) {
 		ret = cpsw_fill_rx_channels(priv);
 		if (ret)
 			return ret;
@@ -2447,7 +2429,7 @@ static int cpsw_set_channels(struct net_device *ndev,
 		}
 	}
 
-	if (cpsw_get_usage_count(cpsw))
+	if (cpsw->usage_count)
 		cpsw_split_res(ndev);
 
 	ret = cpsw_resume_data_pass(ndev);
@@ -2529,7 +2511,7 @@ static int cpsw_set_ringparam(struct net_device *ndev,
 
 	cpdma_set_num_rx_descs(cpsw->dma, ering->rx_pending);
 
-	if (cpsw_get_usage_count(cpsw))
+	if (cpsw->usage_count)
 		cpdma_chan_split_pool(cpsw->dma);
 
 	ret = cpsw_resume_data_pass(ndev);
-- 
2.7.4

Re: [PATCH 0/2] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix susp/resume

[David Miller]

From: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
Date: Thu,  9 Feb 2017 02:07:34 +0200

> These two patches fix suspend/resume chain.

Patch 2 doesn't apply cleanly to the 'net' tree, please
respin this series.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix susp/resume

[Ivan Khoronzhuk]

On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:21:26PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
> Date: Thu,  9 Feb 2017 02:07:34 +0200
> 
> > These two patches fix suspend/resume chain.
> 
> Patch 2 doesn't apply cleanly to the 'net' tree, please
> respin this series.

Strange, I've just checked it on net-next/master, it was applied w/o any
warnings.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix susp/resume

[David Miller]

From: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:54:24 +0200

> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:21:26PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
>> Date: Thu,  9 Feb 2017 02:07:34 +0200
>> 
>> > These two patches fix suspend/resume chain.
>> 
>> Patch 2 doesn't apply cleanly to the 'net' tree, please
>> respin this series.
> 
> Strange, I've just checked it on net-next/master, it was applied w/o any
> warnings.

It makes no sense to test "net-next" when I am telling you that it is
the "net" tree it doesn't apply to.

This is a bug fix, so it should be targetting the "net" tree.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix susp/resume

[Grygorii Strashko]

On 02/09/2017 07:45 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:54:24 +0200
>
>> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:21:26PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
>>> Date: Thu,  9 Feb 2017 02:07:34 +0200
>>>
>>>> These two patches fix suspend/resume chain.
>>>
>>> Patch 2 doesn't apply cleanly to the 'net' tree, please
>>> respin this series.
>>
>> Strange, I've just checked it on net-next/master, it was applied w/o any
>> warnings.
>
> It makes no sense to test "net-next" when I am telling you that it is
> the "net" tree it doesn't apply to.
>
> This is a bug fix, so it should be targetting the "net" tree.
>

Looks like the first fix is for net, but the second one is for net-next
I do not see
03fd01ad0eead23eb79294b6fb4d71dcac493855
"net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: don't duplicate ndev_running"
in net.

-- 
regards,
-grygorii

Re: [PATCH 0/2] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix susp/resume

[Grygorii Strashko]

On 02/09/2017 07:45 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:54:24 +0200
>
>> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:21:26PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
>>> Date: Thu,  9 Feb 2017 02:07:34 +0200
>>>
>>>> These two patches fix suspend/resume chain.
>>>
>>> Patch 2 doesn't apply cleanly to the 'net' tree, please
>>> respin this series.
>>
>> Strange, I've just checked it on net-next/master, it was applied w/o any
>> warnings.
>
> It makes no sense to test "net-next" when I am telling you that it is
> the "net" tree it doesn't apply to.
>
> This is a bug fix, so it should be targetting the "net" tree.
>

Looks like the first fix is for net, but the second one is for net-next
I do not see
03fd01ad0eead23eb79294b6fb4d71dcac493855
"net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: don't duplicate ndev_running"
in net.

-- 
regards,
-grygorii

Re: [PATCH 0/2] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: fix susp/resume

[Ivan Khoronzhuk]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 12:05:07PM -0600, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> 
> 
> On 02/09/2017 07:45 PM, David Miller wrote:
> >From: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
> >Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:54:24 +0200
> >
> >>On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:21:26PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> >>>From: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
> >>>Date: Thu,  9 Feb 2017 02:07:34 +0200
> >>>
> >>>>These two patches fix suspend/resume chain.
> >>>
> >>>Patch 2 doesn't apply cleanly to the 'net' tree, please
> >>>respin this series.
> >>
> >>Strange, I've just checked it on net-next/master, it was applied w/o any
> >>warnings.
> >
> >It makes no sense to test "net-next" when I am telling you that it is
> >the "net" tree it doesn't apply to.
> >
> >This is a bug fix, so it should be targetting the "net" tree.
> >
> 
> Looks like the first fix is for net, but the second one is for net-next
> I do not see
> 03fd01ad0eead23eb79294b6fb4d71dcac493855
> "net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: don't duplicate ndev_running"
> in net.

There is dependency, both for net-next and only first is for net tree

> 
> -- 
> regards,
> -grygorii