netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2] ucc_geth: Rework the TX logic.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090326180543.GA2406@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
Date:	Thu, 26 Mar 2009 21:05:43 +0300
From:	Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com>
To:	Joakim Tjernlund <Joakim.Tjernlund@...nsmode.se>
Cc:	leoli@...escale.com, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ucc_geth: Rework the TX logic.

On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 05:43:25PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
[...]
> > bd == ugeth->confBd[txQ]
> > and
> > !in_be32((u32 __iomem *)(bd+4))
> > 
> > Are not equivalent wrt. speed. MMIO accessors should be rather
> > slow comparing to normal memory.
> 
> Yes, I know. I did it this way because I something broke under stress
> when ugeth->confBd[txQ] instead. The ucc_geth_tx() and 
> ucc_geth_start_xmit()
> gets out of sync somehow.

Would be great if you could investigate it more. Maybe there is
a serious bug somewhere, or maybe you're introducing another
(yet hidden) bug...

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@...il.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2
--
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