Re: [RFC PATCH v2 net-next 0/4] DSA master state tracking

[Ansuel Smith <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 07:39:23PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> This patch set is provided solely for review purposes (therefore not to
> be applied anywhere) and for Ansuel to test whether they resolve the
> slowdown reported here:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/cover/20211207145942.7444-1-ansuelsmth@gmail.com/
> 
> The patches posted here are mainly to offer a consistent
> "master_state_change" chain of events to switches, without duplicates,
> and always starting with operational=true and ending with
> operational=false. This way, drivers should know when they can perform
> Ethernet-based register access, and need not care about more than that.
> 
> Changes in v2:
> - dropped some useless patches
> - also check master operstate.
> 
> Vladimir Oltean (4):
>   net: dsa: provide switch operations for tracking the master state
>   net: dsa: stop updating master MTU from master.c
>   net: dsa: hold rtnl_mutex when calling dsa_master_{setup,teardown}
>   net: dsa: replay master state events in
>     dsa_tree_{setup,teardown}_master
> 
>  include/net/dsa.h  | 11 +++++++
>  net/dsa/dsa2.c     | 80 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  net/dsa/dsa_priv.h | 13 ++++++++
>  net/dsa/master.c   | 29 ++---------------
>  net/dsa/slave.c    | 27 ++++++++++++++++
>  net/dsa/switch.c   | 15 +++++++++
>  6 files changed, 145 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

Hi, I tested this v2 and I still have 2 ethernet mdio failing on init.
I don't think we have other way to track this. Am I wrong?

All works correctly with this and promisc_on_master.
If you have other test, feel free to send me other stuff to test.

(I'm starting to think the fail is caused by some delay that the switch
require to actually start accepting packet or from the reinit? But I'm
not sure... don't know if you notice something from the pcap)

-- 
	Ansuel