> > @@ -5373,6 +5402,30 @@ static int
> mvpp2_ethtool_set_pause_param(struct net_device *dev,
> > struct ethtool_pauseparam *pause) {
> > struct mvpp2_port *port = netdev_priv(dev);
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + if (pause->tx_pause && port->priv->global_tx_fc) {
> > + port->tx_fc = true;
> > + mvpp2_rxq_enable_fc(port);
> > + if (port->priv->percpu_pools) {
> > + for (i = 0; i < port->nrxqs; i++)
> > + mvpp2_bm_pool_update_fc(port, &port-
> >priv->bm_pools[i], true);
> > + } else {
> > + mvpp2_bm_pool_update_fc(port, port->pool_long,
> true);
> > + mvpp2_bm_pool_update_fc(port, port->pool_short,
> true);
> > + }
> > +
> > + } else if (port->priv->global_tx_fc) {
> > + port->tx_fc = false;
> > + mvpp2_rxq_disable_fc(port);
> > + if (port->priv->percpu_pools) {
> > + for (i = 0; i < port->nrxqs; i++)
> > + mvpp2_bm_pool_update_fc(port, &port-
> >priv->bm_pools[i], false);
> > + } else {
> > + mvpp2_bm_pool_update_fc(port, port->pool_long,
> false);
> > + mvpp2_bm_pool_update_fc(port, port->pool_short,
> false);
> > + }
> > + }
>
> This doesn't look correct to me. This function is only called when ethtool -A
> is
> used to change the flow control settings. This is not the place to be
> configuring flow control, as flow control is negotiated with the link partner.
>
> The final resolved flow control settings are available in
> mvpp2_mac_link_up() via the tx_pause and rx_pause parameters.
I would move this to mvpp2_mac_link_up.
Thanks.
> What also concerns me is whether flow control is supported in the existing
> driver at all, given this patch set. If it isn't supported without the
> firmware's
> help, then we should _not_ be negotiating flow control with the link partner
> unless we actually support it, so the Pause and Asym_Pause bits in
> mvpp2_phylink_validate() should be cleared.
RX FC supported, issue only with TX FC.
Stefan,
Regards.
