On 4/8/2020 8:08 AM, asoma...@amd.com wrote:
> From: Amaranath Somalapuram <amaranath.somalapu...@amd.com>
>
> Adding API for get_module_eeprom and get_module_info.
>
> Signed-off-by: Amaranath Somalapuram <amaranath.somalapu...@amd.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/axgbe/axgbe_ethdev.c | 2 +
> drivers/net/axgbe/axgbe_phy.h | 4 ++
> drivers/net/axgbe/axgbe_phy_impl.c | 107 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 113 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/axgbe/axgbe_ethdev.c
> b/drivers/net/axgbe/axgbe_ethdev.c
> index 867058845..ea2f9bba1 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/axgbe/axgbe_ethdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/axgbe/axgbe_ethdev.c
> @@ -214,6 +214,8 @@ static const struct eth_dev_ops axgbe_eth_dev_ops = {
> .dev_supported_ptypes_get = axgbe_dev_supported_ptypes_get,
> .rx_descriptor_status = axgbe_dev_rx_descriptor_status,
> .tx_descriptor_status = axgbe_dev_tx_descriptor_status,
> + .get_module_info = axgbe_get_module_info,
> + .get_module_eeprom = axgbe_get_module_eeprom,
Can you please update the 'axgbe.ini', to document the "Module EEPROM dump"
feature?
<...>
> @@ -141,12 +141,18 @@ enum axgbe_sfp_speed {
>
> #define AXGBE_SFP_EXTD_CC 31
>
> +#define AXGBE_SFP_EEPROM_PAGE_SIZE 256
> +
> struct axgbe_sfp_eeprom {
> u8 base[64];
> u8 extd[32];
> u8 vendor[32];
> };
>
> +struct axgbe_sfp_eeprom_module {
> + u8 base[256];
Is there any relation between this '256' and 'AXGBE_SFP_EEPROM_PAGE_SIZE' ?
<...>
> @@ -734,6 +740,106 @@ static int axgbe_phy_sfp_read_eeprom(struct axgbe_port
> *pdata)
> return ret;
> }
>
> +int axgbe_get_module_info(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> + struct rte_eth_dev_module_info *modinfo)
> +{
> + struct axgbe_port *pdata = dev->data->dev_private;
> + struct axgbe_sfp_eeprom sfp_eeprom;
> + uint8_t eeprom_addr;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = axgbe_phy_get_comm_ownership(pdata);
> +
> + if (ret)
> + return -EIO;
> +
> + ret = axgbe_phy_sfp_get_mux(pdata);
> +
> + if (ret) {
> + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "I2C error setting SFP MUX\n");
> + return ret;
Should here put the ownsership back, 'axgbe_phy_put_comm_ownership()', ?
> + }
> +
> + eeprom_addr = 0;
> + ret = axgbe_phy_i2c_read(pdata, AXGBE_SFP_SERIAL_ID_ADDRESS,
> + &eeprom_addr, sizeof(eeprom_addr),
> + &sfp_eeprom, sizeof(sfp_eeprom));
> +
> + if (ret) {
> + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "I2C error reading SFP EEPROM\n");
> + goto put;
In this case still returning success, shouldn't it return fail?
> + }
> +
> + if (sfp_eeprom.extd[AXGBE_SFP_EXTD_SFF_8472] != 0xff) {
> + if (sfp_eeprom.extd[AXGBE_SFP_EXTD_SFF_8472] == 0) {
> + modinfo->type = RTE_ETH_MODULE_SFF_8079;
> + modinfo->eeprom_len = RTE_ETH_MODULE_SFF_8079_LEN;
> + } else {
> + modinfo->type = RTE_ETH_MODULE_SFF_8472;
> + modinfo->eeprom_len = RTE_ETH_MODULE_SFF_8472_LEN;
> + }
> + }
> +
> +
Can you please remove extra empty line?
> +put:
> + axgbe_phy_sfp_put_mux(pdata);
> + axgbe_phy_put_comm_ownership(pdata);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +int axgbe_get_module_eeprom(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> + struct rte_dev_eeprom_info *info)
> +{
> + struct axgbe_port *pdata = dev->data->dev_private;
> + struct axgbe_sfp_eeprom_module sfp_eeprom;
> + uint8_t eeprom_addr;
> + uint8_t *data;
> + uint32_t i;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = axgbe_phy_get_comm_ownership(pdata);
> +
> + if (ret)
> + return -EIO;
> +
> + if (!info || !info->length || !info->data)
> + return -EINVAL;
What do you think doing input validation before getting ownership?
> +
> + ret = axgbe_phy_sfp_get_mux(pdata);
> + if (ret) {
> + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "I2C error setting SFP MUX\n");
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + eeprom_addr = 0;
> + ret = axgbe_phy_i2c_read(pdata, AXGBE_SFP_SERIAL_ID_ADDRESS,
> + &eeprom_addr, sizeof(eeprom_addr),
> + &sfp_eeprom, sizeof(sfp_eeprom));
> + if (ret) {
> + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "I2C error reading SFP EEPROM\n");
> + goto put;
> + }
> + data = info->data;
> +
> + /* for AXGBE_SFP_SERIAL_ID_ADDRESS */
> + for (i = 0; i < AXGBE_SFP_EEPROM_PAGE_SIZE; i++)
> + data[i] = sfp_eeprom.base[i];
> +
> + eeprom_addr = 0;
> + ret = axgbe_phy_i2c_read(pdata, AXGBE_SFP_DIAG_INFO_ADDRESS,
> + &eeprom_addr, sizeof(eeprom_addr),
> + &sfp_eeprom, sizeof(sfp_eeprom));
> +
> + /* for AXGBE_SFP_DIAG_INFO_ADDRESS */
> + for (i = 0; i < info->length - AXGBE_SFP_EEPROM_PAGE_SIZE; i++)
> + data[i + AXGBE_SFP_EEPROM_PAGE_SIZE] = sfp_eeprom.base[i];
the provided offset information (info->offset) is not used at all, is this a
limitation or forgotten?
> +
> +put:
> + axgbe_phy_sfp_put_mux(pdata);
> + axgbe_phy_put_comm_ownership(pdata);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static void axgbe_phy_sfp_signals(struct axgbe_port *pdata)
> {
> struct axgbe_phy_data *phy_data = pdata->phy_data;
> @@ -741,6 +847,7 @@ static void axgbe_phy_sfp_signals(struct axgbe_port
> *pdata)
> u8 gpio_reg, gpio_ports[2];
> int ret;
>
> +
This looks unrelated, can you please drop from the patch.
> /* Read the input port registers */
> gpio_reg = 0;
> ret = axgbe_phy_i2c_read(pdata, phy_data->sfp_gpio_address,
>
