About to post a patch to fix. Rather than fidgeting with the copy
routine, I want to go back to what we originally proposed - writeq() on
64bit, writel() on 32-bit.
-- james
On 2/23/2018 1:02 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 4:36 PM, Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote:
@@ -138,12 +137,10 @@ lpfc_sli4_wq_put(struct lpfc_queue *q, union lpfc_wqe
*wqe)
if (q->phba->sli3_options & LPFC_SLI4_PHWQ_ENABLED)
bf_set(wqe_wqid, &wqe->generic.wqe_com, q->queue_id);
lpfc_sli_pcimem_bcopy(wqe, temp_wqe, q->entry_size);
- if (q->dpp_enable && q->phba->cfg_enable_dpp) {
+ if (q->dpp_enable && q->phba->cfg_enable_dpp)
/* write to DPP aperture taking advatage of Combined Writes */
- tmp = (uint8_t *)wqe;
- for (i = 0; i < q->entry_size; i += sizeof(uint64_t))
- writeq(*((uint64_t *)(tmp + i)), q->dpp_regaddr + i);
- }
+ memcpy_toio(tmp, q->dpp_regaddr, q->entry_size);
+
/* ensure WQE bcopy and DPP flushed before doorbell write */
wmb();
Not sure where we are with the question of whether memcpy_toio
is a good replacement or not, but further build testing showed that
my patch was completely broken in more than one way:
I mixed up the source and destination arguments, and I used
the uninitialized 'tmp' instead of 'wqe'. Don't try this patch.
Arnd
