[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <C246CAC1457055469EF09E3A7AC4E11A4A4F2CDB@XAP-PVEXMBX01.xlnx.xilinx.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 08:34:53 +0000
From: Appana Durga Kedareswara Rao <appana.durga.rao@...inx.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
CC: Anirudha Sarangi <anirudh@...inx.com>,
"wg@...ndegger.com" <wg@...ndegger.com>,
"mkl@...gutronix.de" <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
Michal Simek <michals@...inx.com>,
Soren Brinkmann <sorenb@...inx.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-can@...r.kernel.org" <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] can: xilinx: use readl/writel instead of
ioread/iowrite
Hi Arnd,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@...db.de]
> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 1:45 PM
> To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> Cc: Appana Durga Kedareswara Rao; Anirudha Sarangi; wg@...ndegger.com;
> mkl@...gutronix.de; Michal Simek; Soren Brinkmann; Appana Durga
> Kedareswara Rao; netdev@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> can@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] can: xilinx: use readl/writel instead of ioread/iowrite
>
> On Thursday 22 October 2015 10:16:02 Kedareswara rao Appana wrote:
> > The driver only supports memory-mapped I/O [by ioremap()], so
> > readl/writel is actually the right thing to do, IMO.
> > During the validation of this driver or IP on ARM 64-bit processor
> > while sending lot of packets observed that the tx packet drop with
> > iowrite Putting the barriers for each tx fifo register write fixes
> > this issue Instead of barriers using writel also fixed this issue.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kedareswara rao Appana <appanad@...inx.com>
>
> The two should really do the same thing: iowrite32() is just a static inline calling
> writel() on both ARM32 and ARM64. On which kernel version did you observe the
> difference? It's possible that an older version used CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP,
> which made this slightly more expensive.
I observed this issue with the 4.0.0 kernel version
>
> If there are barriers that you want to get rid of for performance reasons, you
> should use writel_relaxed(), but be careful to synchronize them correctly with
> regard to DMA. It should be fine in this driver, as it does not perform any DMA,
> but be aware that there is no big-endian version of
> writel_relaxed() at the moment.
There is no DMA in CAN for this IP.
Regards,
Kedar.
>
> Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists