On 07/16/2013 05:28 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
On 07/16/2013 04:06 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
On 07/10/2013 12:10:02 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote:
This implementation doesn't include ring priority, TCP/IP Off-Load, QoS.
Signed-off-by: Fabien Chouteau<chout...@adacore.com>
From the code comments I gather this has been tested on VxWorks. Has it
been tested on Linux, or anywhere else?
You're right, as I said in the cover letter, this has only been tested on
vxWorks.
Could you please give it a try? IIRC eTSEC support should be in upstream
Linux.
[...]
+ /* ring_base = (etsec->regs[RBASEH].value& 0xF)<< 32; */
+ ring_base += etsec->regs[RBASE0 + ring_nbr].value& ~0x7;
+ start_bd_addr = bd_addr = etsec->regs[RBPTR0 + ring_nbr].value& ~0x7;
What about RBDBPH (upper bits of physical address)? Likewise for TX.
I'm only interested in 32bits address spaces, so RBASEH, TBASEH, RBDBPH or
TBDBPH.
Why? I thought e500mc and above can access more than 32bits of physical
address space? Oh, but they're always DPAA?
Alex
