[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090209.175004.122797043.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 17:50:04 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: khc@...waw.pl
Cc: risto.suominen@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 002/002] de2104x: support for systems lacking cache
coherence
From: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 02:45:46 +0100
> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> writes:
>
> > The issue are descriptors that are _written_ by both the cpu
> > and the device. That is the problematic case here.
>
> Do you mean both CPU and 21040 write to the same descriptor at (nearly)
> the same time? Is it TX, RX or both?
>
> I wonder, how would the patch help it?
The problem is when the chip is writing to one neighbouring descriptor
of one which the cpu is writing to at the same time.
> The patch seems to align the descriptors on cache line boundary. That
> IMHO means the corruption is caused by the 21040 writing to e.g. desc
> #0, CPU writing to desc #1, which causes the cache line write bringing
> the old desc #0 back.
Right.
> Is it possible to use uncached memory for coherent allocations (with no
> write side effects) on this machine?
Good question.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists