From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0C7448BB1; Wed, 26 Nov 2025 07:28:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A882A4064F; Wed, 26 Nov 2025 07:28:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtpbgbr2.qq.com (smtpbgbr2.qq.com [54.207.22.56]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D08394026F for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2025 07:28:10 +0100 (CET) X-QQ-mid: Yeas2t1764138480t488t43272 Received: from 3DB253DBDE8942B29385B9DFB0B7E889 (jiawenwu@trustnetic.com [36.20.107.59]) X-QQ-SSF: 0000000000000000000000000000000 From: =?utf-8?b?Smlhd2VuIFd1?= X-BIZMAIL-ID: 17670433720732771141 To: "'Stephen Hemminger'" , "'Thomas Monjalon'" Cc: , References: <20251119214756.6642de30@phoenix.local> <026101dc59e6$5f908850$1eb198f0$@trustnetic.com> <001701dc5ce6$7757aba0$660702e0$@trustnetic.com> In-Reply-To: <001701dc5ce6$7757aba0$660702e0$@trustnetic.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH] net/txgbe: fix the missing old mailbox interface calls Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2025 14:27:59 +0800 Message-ID: <011a01dc5e9d$cf400cf0$6dc026d0$@trustnetic.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Content-Language: zh-cn Thread-Index: AQC9elXKL3qDM07uIHFB8npHaJETJgEpr90PAbZufrkCEQ49hrcau9Dg X-QQ-SENDSIZE: 520 Feedback-ID: Yeas:trustnetic.com:qybglogicsvrgz:qybglogicsvrgz6b-0 X-QQ-XMAILINFO: OFFjJVuQBI5NyaDJwPFJw0igMH8OWKGoF8m+ki/COP/eHq9SNyqVSaQo Ziq1YE0pH7SSkMgxujS2SAq2odh2wWMxsSCQVDH0fOTktUpjRQRMaVQEjNEFRJyUSyCKv07 //Ezep0wXN2JxY4Wpg4xwTpNbtznjfjsTDO23x822xTBV31DfpYjbYNR1UHqiiRLngQwPDA 26e22AXQzodTYqT/L0i0KlD3B/e/XPogCuXvpfTG5428FWiJ/gyqZdzERS2YTqFdAXAK45R 07RiAFr5kwjeVUfmoaCrqQCPzFNlonWGKi4fCfliNEd3GCCc6cLuSb3nEu8kGr1nTSnFCDW 2cBuCeqhjBGJTU6SEBCfmA2L2b8zAmn9ksnCd++txhYjbVAwPr8OUXYRLI5r8qPnBXa9a6s 4PuCfiOzJQxknyPKhPssngn1KHa/rwVDiH88R5xAKXLxwb7FZKMmrCpSv2YxEVM0qRPDVrb 2P+XIDiodwVtanrwotTFMavsOA3ejd9RK4BMiSP4wSQygiyJPeQj/1CSK/Cnh1P/q6B3QuX CceHEi10Mq7jl30/sdWSJy+l1/Azo81tPULkUO1kSxgoeoElSBRq4PXwUQkssJGtXA+3ljr 3Fr5EYA81hB+/bE9rMIkAmLtKC9NT1hk7m+TDYDvdPgoC74sr/IN7HntnizEFwB2fxtVujt XBNfaqxoxexukAflIhzWqgP2LJ5kggMwJqwqub2hl7GR5Yz7xLp/lXbQssX54PUYH7wjMuu PpoBb0dxbUT6jzZEn/v1ZTgTh2l95qTC2XGOy360G6BIDqX/HtLw2GGlVF/m7si3lt1HN/v lSvQjbGuWEvs1gcibLWHdbPgkfsjCZS065fSCPLNaCytdjWKtkOMwKGGroxbc9u3otpjXq0 ZyXbmhSgaauTavxP+ml28D/uixGs6pwjLV04mz9k1Df0iRPL0Xz+BXGC/uo1QY2ScAEt+t4 gDZudwZx/FLpfP1gWlq64HNa6qAqJVfB+daeBN4kk82jJpngHlsKW1MMxStNynWxM4QqrxV A8itFz+BlJMxlyzkUq X-QQ-XMRINFO: Nq+8W0+stu50PRdwbJxPCL0= X-QQ-RECHKSPAM: 0 X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Hi, this fix patch is crucial for the new merged feature in this release. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jiawen Wu > Sent: Monday, November 24, 2025 10:03 AM > To: 'Stephen Hemminger' > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; zaiyuwang@trustnetic.com > Subject: RE: [PATCH] net/txgbe: fix the missing old mailbox interface calls > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 2:25 PM, Jiawen Wu wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 1:48 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > On Wed, 19 Nov 2025 16:56:24 +0800 > > > Jiawen Wu wrote: > > > > > > > @@ -28,6 +29,9 @@ void txgbe_init_ops_aml40(struct txgbe_hw *hw) > > > > mac->init_mac_link_ops = txgbe_init_mac_link_ops_aml40; > > > > mac->get_link_capabilities = txgbe_get_link_capabilities_aml40; > > > > mac->check_link = txgbe_check_mac_link_aml40; > > > > + > > > > + /* MAILBOX */ > > > > + mbx->host_interface_command = txgbe_host_interface_command_aml; > > > > } > > > > > > Maybe that comment means something to you, but it seems like something > > > the next maintainer would not know what it means. Could you explain it more? > > > > For different devices, the mailbox flow between software and firmware is > > different. There are several mailbox command in the txgbe driver, but only > > txgbe_hic_sr_read() was changed to use the new flow in commit > > 6a139ade82e7 ("net/txgbe: add new SW-FW mailbox interface"). Because > > this function invoke the txgbe_hic_unlocked() directly without SW-FW > > semaphore, I guess. > > > > It lead to other mailbox commands timeout for Amber-Lite devices, which > > is required to use the new flow. So this patch fills in the missing part. > > > > For the sake of code tidy, txgbe_hic_sr_read() should change to use the > > locked function txgbe_host_interface_command(), and this function could > > be change to pointer in struct txgbe_mbx_info for different devices. > > Hi Stephen Hemminger, > > Does this explanation is sufficient? Should I send v2 patch with these logs?