[PATCH net-next 1/2] net: stmmac: dwmac4: Read the UC filter size from hardware capabilities
Nicolai Buchwitz
nb at tipi-net.de
Mon Aug 31 05:26:36 PDT 2026
On 31.8.2026 14:15, Maxime Chevallier wrote:
> On 8/31/26 14:04, Nicolai Buchwitz wrote:
>> Hi Maxime
>>
>> On 31.8.2026 09:01, Maxime Chevallier wrote:
>>> dwmac4 has multiple banks of perfect filter entries, independently
>>> configurable during IP integration.
>>>
>>> The multi_addr bank reports a number between 0 and 31 corresponding
>>> to
>>> the actual number of entries in that bank, while the 32 and 64 banks
>>> are all-or-nothing.
>>>
>>> Expose these caps over debugfs as well.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier at bootlin.com>
>>> ---
>>
>>> [...]
>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4.h
>>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4.h
>>> index 6382836828ba..89368e34a388 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4.h
>>> @@ -176,7 +176,9 @@ enum power_event {
>>>
>>> /* MAC HW features0 bitmap */
>>> #define GMAC_HW_FEAT_SAVLANINS BIT(27)
>>> -#define GMAC_HW_FEAT_ADDMAC BIT(18)
>>> +#define GMAC_HW_FEAT_MACADR64SEL BIT(24)
>>> +#define GMAC_HW_FEAT_MACADR32SEL BIT(23)
>>> +#define GMAC_HW_FEAT_ADDMAC GENMASK(22, 18)
>>> #define GMAC_HW_FEAT_RXCOESEL BIT(16)
>>> #define GMAC_HW_FEAT_TXCOSEL BIT(14)
>>> #define GMAC_HW_FEAT_EEESEL BIT(13)
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_dma.c
>>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_dma.c
>>> index 23ffe1adcd0d..14ac3f0e51f7 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_dma.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac4_dma.c
>>> @@ -388,6 +388,8 @@ static int dwmac4_get_hw_feature(void __iomem
>>> *ioaddr,
>>> dma_cap->half_duplex = (hw_cap & GMAC_HW_FEAT_HDSEL) >> 2;
>>> dma_cap->vlhash = (hw_cap & GMAC_HW_FEAT_VLHASH) >> 4;
>>> dma_cap->multi_addr = (hw_cap & GMAC_HW_FEAT_ADDMAC) >> 18;
>>
>> Now that ADDMAC has grown from single bit to a mask, the hardcoded 18
>> has to match
>> dwmac4.h. So IMHO it would make sense to use FIELD_GET() here (like
>> actphyif)?
>
> It's hardcoded all over, if you look at how all the other fields from
> the features
> are read. I can change it if you really think it's worth, however I'd
> rather
> do a proper cleanup of how all the properties are read at once :)
Perfectly fine for me. Ran into a similar, but unrelated issue recently,
so I just
wanted to flag it (for the future) :)
>
>>
>>> + dma_cap->additional_32_addr = (hw_cap &
>>> GMAC_HW_FEAT_MACADR32SEL) >> 23;
>>> + dma_cap->additional_64_addr = (hw_cap &
>>> GMAC_HW_FEAT_MACADR64SEL) >> 24;
>>> dma_cap->pcs = (hw_cap & GMAC_HW_FEAT_PCSSEL) >> 3;
>>> dma_cap->sma_mdio = (hw_cap & GMAC_HW_FEAT_SMASEL) >> 5;
>>> dma_cap->pmt_remote_wake_up = (hw_cap & GMAC_HW_FEAT_RWKSEL) >>
>>> 6;
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
>>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
>>> index f2fc89176654..a885f8cfef21 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
>>> @@ -6580,6 +6580,18 @@ static int stmmac_dma_cap_show(struct seq_file
>>> *seq, void *v)
>>> seq_printf(seq,
>>> "\tNumber of Additional MAC address registers: %d\n",
>>> priv->dma_cap.multi_addr);
>>> + } else if (priv->plat->core_type == DWMAC_CORE_GMAC4) {
>>> + seq_printf(seq,
>>> + "\tNumber of MAC address registers (1-31): %d\n",
>>> + priv->dma_cap.multi_addr);
>>> + seq_printf(seq,
>>> + "\tAdditional 32 MAC address registers (32-63):
>>> %s\n",
>>> + priv->dma_cap.additional_32_addr ? "Y" : "N");
>>> + seq_printf(seq,
>>> + "\tAdditional 64 MAC address registers (64-127):
>>> %s\n",
>>> + priv->dma_cap.additional_64_addr ? "Y" : "N");
>>> + seq_printf(seq, "\tHash Filter: %s\n",
>>> + (priv->dma_cap.hash_filter) ? "Y" : "N");
>>
>> hash_filter seems to be only set in dwmac1000_dma.c? So on dwmac4 it
>> would always print N?
>
> Yeah but dwmac4 has a hash filter, but same as the UC filter it's just
> not plumbed
> in :/
>
> Let's leave this flag here, hash filter addition for MC filtering is
> coming-up, so let's not
> drop it now only to re-enable it after, one of the other wonderful
> discoveries found by
> running the selftests...
Also fine with me.
>
>>
>>> } else {
>>> seq_printf(seq, "\tHash Filter: %s\n",
>>> (priv->dma_cap.hash_filter) ? "Y" : "N");
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Nicolai
>
> Maxime
With both comments addressed and agreed to keep it as is until a cleanup
in the future:
Reviewed-by: Nicolai Buchwitz <nb at tipi-net.de>
Thanks,
Nicolai
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list