On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 01:47:16PM +0100, Karol Kolacinski wrote:
> From: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com>
> 
> The ice_ptp_reset() function uses a goto to skip past clock owner
> operations if performing a PF reset or if the device is not the clock
> owner. This is a bit confusing. Factor this out into
> ice_ptp_rebuild_owner() instead.
> 
> The ice_ptp_reset() function is called by ice_rebuild() to restore PTP
> functionality after a device reset. Follow the convention set by the
> ice_main.c file and rename this function to ice_ptp_rebuild(), in the
> same way that we have ice_prepare_for_reset() and
> ice_ptp_prepare_for_reset().

nit: This feels more like two changes than one,
     which I might have put into two patches.

> Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Karol Kolacinski <karol.kolacin...@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com>

...

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_ptp.c 
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_ptp.c
> index fe2d8389627b..8a589f853e96 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_ptp.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_ptp.c
> @@ -2665,11 +2665,13 @@ void ice_ptp_prepare_for_reset(struct ice_pf *pf, 
> enum ice_reset_req reset_type)
>  }
>  
>  /**
> - * ice_ptp_reset - Initialize PTP hardware clock support after reset
> + * ice_ptp_rebuild_owner - Initialize PTP clock owner after reset
>   * @pf: Board private structure
> - * @reset_type: the reset type being performed
> + *
> + * Companion function for ice_ptp_rebuild() which handles tasks that only the
> + * PTP clock owner instance should perform.
>   */
> -void ice_ptp_reset(struct ice_pf *pf, enum ice_reset_req reset_type)
> +static int ice_ptp_rebuild_owner(struct ice_pf *pf)
>  {
>       struct ice_ptp *ptp = &pf->ptp;
>       struct ice_hw *hw = &pf->hw;
> @@ -2677,34 +2679,21 @@ void ice_ptp_reset(struct ice_pf *pf, enum 
> ice_reset_req reset_type)
>       u64 time_diff;
>       int err;
>  
> -     if (ptp->state != ICE_PTP_RESETTING) {
> -             if (ptp->state == ICE_PTP_READY) {
> -                     ice_ptp_prepare_for_reset(pf, reset_type);
> -             } else {
> -                     err = -EINVAL;
> -                     dev_err(ice_pf_to_dev(pf), "PTP was not initialized\n");
> -                     goto err;
> -             }
> -     }
> -
> -     if (reset_type == ICE_RESET_PFR || !ice_pf_src_tmr_owned(pf))
> -             goto pfr;
> -
>       err = ice_ptp_init_phc(hw);
>       if (err)
> -             goto err;
> +             return err;
>  
>       /* Acquire the global hardware lock */
>       if (!ice_ptp_lock(hw)) {
>               err = -EBUSY;
> -             goto err;
> +             return err;
>       }
>  
>       /* Write the increment time value to PHY and LAN */
>       err = ice_ptp_write_incval(hw, ice_base_incval(pf));
>       if (err) {
>               ice_ptp_unlock(hw);
> -             goto err;
> +             return err;
>       }
>  
>       /* Write the initial Time value to PHY and LAN using the cached PHC
> @@ -2720,7 +2709,7 @@ void ice_ptp_reset(struct ice_pf *pf, enum 
> ice_reset_req reset_type)
>       err = ice_ptp_write_init(pf, &ts);
>       if (err) {
>               ice_ptp_unlock(hw);
> -             goto err;
> +             return err;
>       }
>  
>       /* Release the global hardware lock */
> @@ -2729,11 +2718,41 @@ void ice_ptp_reset(struct ice_pf *pf, enum 
> ice_reset_req reset_type)
>       if (!ice_is_e810(hw)) {
>               /* Enable quad interrupts */
>               err = ice_ptp_cfg_phy_interrupt(pf, true, 1);
> +             if (err)
> +                     return err;
> +
> +             ice_ptp_restart_all_phy(pf);

The conditions for calling ice_ptp_restart_all_phy() seem to have
changed (though perhaps in practice they are the same).
And the ordering of this operation relative to the following code has
changed:

        /* Init Tx structures */
        if (ice_is_e810(&pf->hw)) {
                err = ice_ptp_init_tx_e810(pf, &ptp->port.tx);
        } else {
                kthread_init_delayed_work(&ptp->port.ov_work,
                                          ice_ptp_wait_for_offsets);
                err = ice_ptp_init_tx_e82x(pf, &ptp->port.tx,
                                           ptp->port.port_num);
        }

        ptp->state = ICE_PTP_READY;

Is this intentional?

I do see that the above code is removed in the following patch,
and replaced by a call to ice_ptp_flush_all_tx_tracker()
in ice_ptp_rebuild_owner(). But perhaps this patch
should move this code block code to that location?

> +     }
> +
> +     return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * ice_ptp_rebuild - Initialize PTP hardware clock support after reset
> + * @pf: Board private structure
> + * @reset_type: the reset type being performed
> + */
> +void ice_ptp_rebuild(struct ice_pf *pf, enum ice_reset_req reset_type)
> +{
> +     struct ice_ptp *ptp = &pf->ptp;
> +     int err;
> +
> +     if (ptp->state != ICE_PTP_RESETTING) {
> +             if (ptp->state == ICE_PTP_READY) {
> +                     ice_ptp_prepare_for_reset(pf, reset_type);
> +             } else {
> +                     err = -EINVAL;
> +                     dev_err(ice_pf_to_dev(pf), "PTP was not initialized\n");
> +                     goto err;
> +             }
> +     }
> +
> +     if (ice_pf_src_tmr_owned(pf) && reset_type != ICE_RESET_PFR) {
> +             err = ice_ptp_rebuild_owner(pf);
>               if (err)
>                       goto err;
>       }
>  
> -pfr:
>       /* Init Tx structures */
>       if (ice_is_e810(&pf->hw)) {
>               err = ice_ptp_init_tx_e810(pf, &ptp->port.tx);
> @@ -2748,11 +2767,6 @@ void ice_ptp_reset(struct ice_pf *pf, enum 
> ice_reset_req reset_type)
>  
>       ptp->state = ICE_PTP_READY;
>  
> -     /* Restart the PHY timestamping block */
> -     if (!test_bit(ICE_PFR_REQ, pf->state) &&
> -         ice_pf_src_tmr_owned(pf))
> -             ice_ptp_restart_all_phy(pf);
> -
>       /* Start periodic work going */
>       kthread_queue_delayed_work(ptp->kworker, &ptp->work, 0);
>  

...

Reply via email to