Did you enable the descriptor bit 3 to have a try?

________________________________

        From: Ben Menchaca [mailto:ben.mench...@gmail.com] 
        Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 2:10 PM
        To: Liu Dave-R63238
        Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
        Subject: Re: 83xx: Marking or Allocating Pages as
Cache-Inhibited
        
        
        I can look at ACR morning...although I can say with a fair
amount of certainty that I have not changed it from the POR value.
        
        I will try enabling No Snoop for CSB in the descriptor (bit 3,
yes?)...this seems a bit counterintuitive to me.
        
        What is the hope regarding these two?  Some combination I am not
seeing?
        
        
        
        On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:40 PM, Liu Dave-R63238
<dave...@freescale.com> wrote:
        

                what is the value of ACR register?


________________________________

                        From: Ben Menchaca
[mailto:ben.mench...@gmail.com] 
                        Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 1:38 PM
                        To: Liu Dave-R63238
                        Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
                        Subject: Re: 83xx: Marking or Allocating Pages
as Cache-Inhibited
                        
                        
                        1.  BAT2 in linux is set to WIMG=0010, and
covers all 64M
                        2.  PEX_DEVICE_CONTROL in PCI-E Config Space
(0x54): 0x1020
                        3.  PEX_xDMA_CTRL is set to 0x00000401 at the
initiation of the DMA.
                        4.  OWAR0 is set to 0xFFFFF005, so NSNP is 0.
                        5.  The DMA descriptor (randomly chosen when I
hit a trigger...just ignore the size...) contains 0002AFF3 at offset 0,
so nosnoops are cleared.  
                        
                        Core is 400MHz, and CSB is 133MHz.
                        
                        - Ben
                        
                        
                        On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Liu Dave-R63238
<dave...@freescale.com> wrote:
                        

                                and what settings  is DMA description
bit 3?
                                

                                > -----Original Message-----
                                > From:
linuxppc-dev-bounces+daveliu=freescale....@ozlabs.org
                                > [mailto:linuxppc-dev-bounces+daveliu
<mailto:linuxppc-dev-bounces%2Bdaveliu> =freescale....@ozlabs.org]
                                
                                >  On Behalf Of Liu Dave-R63238
                                > Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 1:22 PM
                                > To: Ben Menchaca;
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
                                > Subject: RE: 83xx: Marking or
Allocating Pages as Cache-Inhibited
                                >
                                > Did you enable the snoop bit at
PEX_WDMA_CTRL[SNOOP] and
                                > PEX_RDMA_CTRL[SNOOP]?
                                >
                                > What is the freq settings? CORE/CSB
bus.
                                >
                                > Thanks, Dave
                                >
                                > ________________________________
                                >
                                >       From:
linuxppc-dev-bounces+daveliu=freescale....@ozlabs.org
                                > [mailto:linuxppc-dev-bounces+daveliu
<mailto:linuxppc-dev-bounces%2Bdaveliu> =freescale....@ozlabs.org]
                                >  On Behalf Of Ben Menchaca
                                >       Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009
12:33 PM
                                >       To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
                                >       Subject: 83xx: Marking or
Allocating Pages as Cache-Inhibited
                                >
                                >
                                >       I am working on a Freescale
8314e design, and the
                                > embedded device is configured as a
PCI-e endpoint running a
                                > 2.6.27-5 kernel.  For context, we have
written a kernel
                                > module which, among other things, uses
the RDMA/WDMA engine
                                > in the PCI-e IP block.  On the host
side, these DMAs are
                                > coherent.  However, on the embedded
side, things are quite a
                                > bit less rosy; we must manually
flush/invalidate cache lines
                                > for WDMA/RDMAs to occur successfully.
After speaking with
                                > (several) FAEs at Freescale, we
believe there is a
                                > configuration issue that is the cause,
but we have yet to
                                > have anyone successfully point to it.
                                >
                                >       Disabling the data cache
altogether resolves the issue
                                > entirely, but of course, also
completely tanks performance.
                                > As a temporary workaround, I would
like to simply mark the
                                > pages (obtained currently via
dma_alloc_coherent) involved as
                                > cache-inhibited.  I have attempted to
do this via some
                                > snippets remaining in fec.c
(va_to_pte, uncache_pte to set
                                > _PAGE_NO_CACHE, flush_tlb_page, then
unmap_pte), but this is
                                > almost certainly braindead; va_to_pte
is not a part of the
                                > 83xx source, as far as I can tell; 8xx
only.
                                >
                                >       A quick pointer in the correct
direction for marking
                                > pages as cache-inhibited on a 2.6.27-5
kernel would be
                                > appreciated, or if my approach to a
workaround is flawed, a
                                > pointer to the correct way would be
great.
                                >
                                >       Ben Menchaca
                                >
                                >
                                
                                >
_______________________________________________
                                > Linuxppc-dev mailing list
                                > Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
                                >
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
                                >
                                >
                                



_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Reply via email to