On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 03:59:26PM -0600, George McCollister wrote:
> +static int xrs700x_hsr_join(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
> + struct net_device *hsr)
> +{
> + unsigned int val = XRS_HSR_CFG_HSR_PRP;
> + struct dsa_port *partner = NULL, *dp;
> + struct xrs700x *priv = ds->priv;
> + struct net_device *slave;
> + enum hsr_version ver;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = hsr_get_version(hsr, &ver);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + if (ver == HSR_V1)
> + val |= XRS_HSR_CFG_HSR;
> + else if (ver == PRP_V1)
> + val |= XRS_HSR_CFG_PRP;
> + else
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> + dsa_hsr_foreach_port(dp, ds, hsr) {
> + partner = dp;
> + }
> +
> + /* We can't enable redundancy on the switch until both
> + * redundant ports have signed up.
> + */
> + if (!partner)
> + return 0;
> +
> + regmap_fields_write(priv->ps_forward, partner->index,
> + XRS_PORT_DISABLED);
> + regmap_fields_write(priv->ps_forward, port, XRS_PORT_DISABLED);
> +
> + regmap_write(priv->regmap, XRS_HSR_CFG(partner->index),
> + val | XRS_HSR_CFG_LANID_A);
> + regmap_write(priv->regmap, XRS_HSR_CFG(port),
> + val | XRS_HSR_CFG_LANID_B);
> +
> + /* Clear bits for both redundant ports (HSR only) and the CPU port to
> + * enable forwarding.
> + */
> + val = GENMASK(ds->num_ports - 1, 0);
> + if (ver == HSR_V1) {
> + val &= ~BIT(partner->index);
> + val &= ~BIT(port);
> + }
> + val &= ~BIT(dsa_upstream_port(ds, port));
> + regmap_write(priv->regmap, XRS_PORT_FWD_MASK(partner->index), val);
> + regmap_write(priv->regmap, XRS_PORT_FWD_MASK(port), val);
> +
> + regmap_fields_write(priv->ps_forward, partner->index,
> + XRS_PORT_FORWARDING);
> + regmap_fields_write(priv->ps_forward, port, XRS_PORT_FORWARDING);
> +
> + slave = dsa_to_port(ds, port)->slave;
> +
> + slave->features |= NETIF_F_HW_HSR_TAG_INS | NETIF_F_HW_HSR_TAG_RM |
> + NETIF_F_HW_HSR_FWD | NETIF_F_HW_HSR_DUP;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
Is it deliberate that only one slave HSR/PRP port will have the offload
ethtool features set? If yes, then I find that a bit odd from a user
point of view.
