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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 11:46:34 +0000 From: Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, "Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com" <Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com> CC: "thierry.reding@...il.com" <thierry.reding@...il.com>, "peppe.cavallaro@...com" <peppe.cavallaro@...com>, "alexandre.torgue@...com" <alexandre.torgue@...com>, "f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>, "jonathanh@...dia.com" <jonathanh@...dia.com>, "bbiswas@...dia.com" <bbiswas@...dia.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org> Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 0/2] net: stmmac: Enhanced addressing mode for DWMAC 4.10 From: Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com> Date: Sep/25/2019, 12:41:04 (UTC+00:00) > From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> > Date: Sep/25/2019, 12:33:53 (UTC+00:00) > > > From: Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com> > > Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 10:44:53 +0000 > > > > > From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> > > > Date: Sep/24/2019, 20:45:08 (UTC+00:00) > > > > > >> From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com> > > >> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 19:00:34 +0200 > > >> > > >> Also, you're now writing to the high 32-bits unconditionally, even when > > >> it will always be zero because of 32-bit addressing. That looks like > > >> a step backwards to me. > > > > > > Don't agree. As per previous discussions and as per my IP knowledge, if > > > EAME is not enabled / not supported the register can still be written. > > > This is not fast path and will not impact any remaining operation. Can > > > you please explain what exactly is the concern about this ? > > > > > > Anyway, this is an important feature for performance so I hope Thierry > > > re-submits this once -next opens and addressing the review comments. > > > > Perhaps I misunderstand the context, isn't this code writing the > > descriptors for every packet? > > No, its just setting up the base address for the descriptors which is > done in open(). The one that's in the fast path is the tail address, > which is always the lower 32 bits. Oops, sorry. Indeed it's done in refill operation in function dwmac4_set_addr() for rx/tx which is fast path so you do have a point that I was not seeing. Thanks for bringing this up! Now, the point would be: a) Is it faster to have an condition check in dwmac4_set_addr(), or b) Always write to descs the upper 32 bits. Which always exists in the IP and is a standard write to memory. --- Thanks, Jose Miguel Abreu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists