On 4/4/2023 10:23 pm, Kinsey Moore wrote: > On Mon, Apr 3, 2023 at 8:00 PM Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org > <mailto:chr...@rtems.org>> wrote: > > On 31/3/2023 8:13 am, Kinsey Moore wrote: > > Xilinx wrote their A53 HAL with the assumption that the CPU did not > > support cache invalidation without a flush, so the flush and > > invalidation functions were combined and all range invalidations are > > promoted to flush/invalidate. The implementation written for lwIP was > > written to the original intent of the function and thus was not flushing > > in some cases when it needed to. This resolves that issue which prevents > > DMA transmit errors in some cases. > > --- > > rtemslwip/zynqmp/xil_shims.c | 7 ++++++- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/rtemslwip/zynqmp/xil_shims.c b/rtemslwip/zynqmp/xil_shims.c > > index 2eda0c5..1b1b3cf 100644 > > --- a/rtemslwip/zynqmp/xil_shims.c > > +++ b/rtemslwip/zynqmp/xil_shims.c > > @@ -102,7 +102,12 @@ void XScuGic_DisableIntr ( u32 DistBaseAddress, u32 > Int_Id ) > > rtems_interrupt_vector_disable( Int_Id ); > > } > > > > +/* > > + * The Xilinx code was written such that it assumed there was no > invalidate-only > > + * functionality on A53 cores. This function must flush and invalidate > because > > + * of how they mapped things. > > + */ > > void Xil_DCacheInvalidateRange( INTPTR adr, INTPTR len ) > > { > > - rtems_cache_invalidate_multiple_data_lines( (const void *) adr, len > ); > > + rtems_cache_flush_multiple_data_lines( (const void *) adr, len ); > > } > > Does the Xilinx code use Xil_DCacheInvalidateRange in any DMA receive > paths? If > it does is this change correct as the invalidate has been removed? > > > It just so happens that the way the code was written, a flush and invalidate > works fine for the receive path. The invalidation that occurs in the receive > path occurs before the pointer to the memory is passed to the DMA engine, so a > flush there doesn't hurt anything (at least for this particular driver). If > more > Xilinx drivers get pulled in, that may have to be reevaluated.
Sure. If you think it is fine and are happy that is all that is need. Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
