[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BYAPR12MB3269D050556BD51030DCDDFCD3C70@BYAPR12MB3269.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 10:49:49 +0000
From: Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com>
To: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com>,
Lars Persson <lists@...h.nu>,
Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>
CC: Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com"
<linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
linux-tegra <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 3/3] net: stmmac: Introducing support for Page
Pool
From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
Date: Jul/23/2019, 11:38:33 (UTC+00:00)
>
> On 23/07/2019 11:07, Jose Abreu wrote:
> > From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
> > Date: Jul/23/2019, 11:01:24 (UTC+00:00)
> >
> >> This appears to be a winner and by disabling the SMMU for the ethernet
> >> controller and reverting commit 954a03be033c7cef80ddc232e7cbdb17df735663
> >> this worked! So yes appears to be related to the SMMU being enabled. We
> >> had to enable the SMMU for ethernet recently due to commit
> >> 954a03be033c7cef80ddc232e7cbdb17df735663.
> >
> > Finally :)
> >
> > However, from "git show 954a03be033c7cef80ddc232e7cbdb17df735663":
> >
> > + There are few reasons to allow unmatched stream bypass, and
> > + even fewer good ones. If saying YES here breaks your board
> > + you should work on fixing your board.
> >
> > So, how can we fix this ? Is your ethernet DT node marked as
> > "dma-coherent;" ?
>
> TBH I have no idea. I can't say I fully understand your change or how it
> is breaking things for us.
>
> Currently, the Tegra DT binding does not have 'dma-coherent' set. I see
> this is optional, but I am not sure how you determine whether or not
> this should be set.
From my understanding it means that your device / IP DMA accesses are coherent regarding the CPU point of view. I think it will be the case if GMAC is not behind any kind of IOMMU in the HW arch.
I don't know about this SMMU but the source does have some special
conditions when device is dma-coherent.
---
Thanks,
Jose Miguel Abreu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists