[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b3d6b773-4ca1-a72e-933b-455c5d2b91c9@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 17:18:28 +0200
From: Philipp Hortmann <philipp.g.hortmann@...il.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Forest Bond <forest@...ttletooquiet.net>,
linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] staging: vt6655: Replace VNSvInPortD with ioread32
On 4/27/22 07:55, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> MACvRegBitsOn(iobase, MAC_REG_TFTCTL, TFTCTL_TSFCNTRRD);
>> for (ww = 0; ww < W_MAX_TIMEOUT; ww++) {
>> @@ -753,8 +754,9 @@ bool CARDbGetCurrentTSF(struct vnt_private *priv, u64 *pqwCurrTSF)
>> }
>> if (ww == W_MAX_TIMEOUT)
>> return false;
>> - VNSvInPortD(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR, (u32 *)pqwCurrTSF);
>> - VNSvInPortD(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR + 4, (u32 *)pqwCurrTSF + 1);
>> + low = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR);
>> + high = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR + 4);
>> + *pqwCurrTSF = low + ((u64)high << 32);
> Are you_sure_ this is doing the same thing?
>
To compare I used the following code:
VNSvInPortD(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR, (u32 *)pqwCurrTSF);
VNSvInPortD(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR + 4, (u32 *)pqwCurrTSF + 1);
dev_info(&priv->pcid->dev, "CARDbGetCurrentTSF *pqwCurrTSF: %llx",
*pqwCurrTSF);
low = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR);
high = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR + 4);
dev_info(&priv->pcid->dev, "CARDbGetCurrentTSF low/high: %llx", low +
((u64)high << 32));
Output:
vt6655 0000:01:05.0: CARDbGetCurrentTSF *pqwCurrTSF: 1155ba
vt6655 0000:01:05.0: CARDbGetCurrentTSF low/high: 1155ba
vt6655 0000:01:05.0: CARDbGetCurrentTSF *pqwCurrTSF: 35d7cbd7c
vt6655 0000:01:05.0: CARDbGetCurrentTSF low/high: 35d7cbd7c
vt6655 0000:01:05.0: CARDbGetCurrentTSF *pqwCurrTSF: 35d7cbd8a
vt6655 0000:01:05.0: CARDbGetCurrentTSF low/high: 35d7cbd8a
So no different results for numbers larger than 32 Bit.
The pqwCurrTSF is a microsecond counter running in the WLAN Router:
At a later Measurement I got the following values:
269 seconds later: 0x3 6d89 fd91 -> 269.30 seconds
15 minutes later: 0x3 6d89 fd91 -> 15.54 minutes
8:38 hours later: 0xa 9787 ad91 -> 8.62 hours
So both methods work on a AMD64 processor.
> Adding 1 to a u64 pointer increments it by a full u64. So I guess the
> cast to u32 * moves it only by a u32? Hopefully? That's messy.
That is the reason why I wanted to change this.
> Why not keep the current mess and do:
> pqwCurrTSF = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR);
> ((u32 *)pqwCurTSF + 1) = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR + 4);
> Or does that not compile?
drivers/staging/vt6655/card.c:760:13: warning: assignment to ‘u64 *’
{aka ‘long long unsigned int *’} from ‘unsigned int’ makes pointer from
integer without a cast [-Wint-conversion]
760 | pqwCurrTSF = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR);
| ^
drivers/staging/vt6655/card.c:761:26: error: lvalue required as left
operand of assignment
761 | ((u32 *)pqwCurrTSF + 1) = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR + 4);
| ^
This compiles:
*(u32 *)pqwCurrTSF = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR);
*((u32 *)pqwCurrTSF + 1) = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR + 4);
Log:
vt6655 0000:01:05.0: CARDbGetCurrentTSF *pqwCurrTSF: 178f41d90
vt6655 0000:01:05.0: CARDbGetCurrentTSF with ioread: 178f41d90
Ick, how about:
> u32 *temp = (u32 *)pqwCurTSF;
>
> temp = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR);
> temp++;
> temp = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR + 4);
This is working:
u32 *temp = (u32 *)pqwCurrTSF;
*temp = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR);
temp++;
*temp = ioread32(iobase + MAC_REG_TSFCNTR + 4);
> As that duplicates the current code a bit better.
>
> I don't know, it's like polishing dirt, in the end, it's still dirt...
>
> How about looking at the caller of this to see what it expects to do
> with this information? Unwind the mess from there?
>
I will propose something for that.
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Thanks
Bye Philipp
Powered by blists - more mailing lists