qoriq: Watchguard Firebox M300 source only

[Stijn Tintel]

Hi Evan,

Glad to see more interest in the QorIQ target.

On 1/10/2024 06:03, Evan Jobling via openwrt-devel wrote:
> Subject:
> qoriq: Watchguard Firebox M300 source only
> From:
> Evan Jobling <evan.jobling at mslsc.com.au>
> Date:
> 1/10/2024 06:03
>
> To:
> openwrt-devel <openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org>
>
>
>
> Hi All.
>
> Recently acquired a Firebox M300. It is currently source-only and looks
> like it needs some work to get it into the same state as other targets.
> There was a question ages ago on the forum but was left unanswered.
It would help if you link the forum post. People tend to have their 
preferred communication media. Forums definitely don't fit that category 
for me, so the chance of me missing things there are extremely high.
>
> I'm wondering whether anyone can provide input on what work would be required
> to get this from source-only into the snapshot builds etc?
The target was made source-only because it is considered exotic, and 
most likely had only a handful of users initially. If that has changed, 
I'm perfectly fine with removing source-only on qoriq in its current state.
>
> Goals for me are:
> Correct LuCI homepage interface status issue.
> Correct interface naming.
> Set mac address in device tree, rather than in 02_network script.
>
> Please let me know what other tests/changes/output I'd need to provide to
> promote this device.
>
> Further discussion on what I've found so far:
>
> Device tree changes:and
> I am wondering whether it should be modified for
> removing the extra, unused CPU port.
> We're currently using port 6, with port 5 disabled on the switch side.
> However the associated ethernet device is still enabled on CPU side.
> i.e. we have an unused eth3, with cpu port for the switch being eth4.
>
> In other devices (best example being linksys armada 385 devices) the cpu port
> is changed from 5 to 6 by a patch.
> With the device tree now only having one cpu port listed on the switch side.
>
> I noticed that kernel 6.6 now has support for multiple CPU
> ports connected to a DSA switch.
> I haven't had success having it work with the linux documentation,
> which is configuring both ethernet devices and then linux should
> pick the first one.
IIRC, the M300 has 2 ports connected to the switch. We should figure out 
how to make that work, rather than removing the currently unused CPU port.
>
> Network device naming:
> I know how to rename them with iputils, but I'd appreciate
> direction on the "openwrt" way of renaming devices.
>
> I understand I can set the ethernet devices correctly with
> ucidef_set_network_device_path.
> I'm unsure on how to do it with dsa.
> The "label" property doesn't look like it's
> going to work as I first need to rename eth3/eth4
> to something like "conduit0/conduit1" first.
> Then set the <sweth> devices to be eth3-eth7 from
IIRC, you simply cannot rename ethernet interfaces with device tree.
>
>
> Packages:
> I noticed that lots of packages required CONFIG_BROKEN=y set.
Could you give some examples? I have not enabled CONFIG_BROKEN=y 
anywhere, and I have been running 2 M300's in a HA setup for several 
years. Might be unrelated to QorIQ.
> Most notably on my initial test, LuCI doesn't show all
> interfaces status on the home screen.
> Yet to go through and test anything thoroughly.
> A list of packages that would need to be confirmed
> working for this target to be promoted would be
> helpful.
I don't really use LuCI, so can't be of help here. But this should also 
not block us from removing source-only from qoriq.
>
> Cheers,
> Evan.

I propose you send a patch to remove source-only from the qoriq target 
in its current form. If there are no objections within 2 weeks after 
submission I'll merge it and poke people to reconfigure the buildbots.

We can look into everything else on an individual basis.

Best,
Stijn