Hi Prabhakar,
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:03 AM, Prabhakar Kushwaha
prabha...@freescale.com wrote:
Change infinite loop mechanism to timer based polling.
Signed-off-by: Prabhakar Kushwaha prabha...@freescale.com
---
Changes for v2: Sending as it is for patchset
drivers/net/ldpaa_eth/ldpaa_eth.c | 13 +++--
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ldpaa_eth/ldpaa_eth.c
b/drivers/net/ldpaa_eth/ldpaa_eth.c
index 839e78a..fe8f189 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ldpaa_eth/ldpaa_eth.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ldpaa_eth/ldpaa_eth.c
@@ -31,6 +31,8 @@ static void ldpaa_eth_rx(struct ldpaa_eth_priv *priv,
uint32_t fd_length;
struct ldpaa_fas *fas;
uint32_t status, err;
+ u32 timeo = (CONFIG_SYS_HZ * 2) / 1000;
+ u32 time_start;
struct qbman_release_desc releasedesc;
struct qbman_swp *swp = dflt_dpio-sw_portal;
@@ -65,10 +67,15 @@ error:
flush_dcache_range(fd_addr, fd_addr + LDPAA_ETH_RX_BUFFER_SIZE);
qbman_release_desc_clear(releasedesc);
qbman_release_desc_set_bpid(releasedesc, dflt_dpbp-dpbp_attr.bpid);
+ time_start = get_timer(0);
do {
/* Release buffer into the QBMAN */
err = qbman_swp_release(swp, releasedesc, fd_addr, 1);
- } while (err == -EBUSY);
+ } while (get_timer(time_start) timeo err == -EBUSY);
+
+ if (get_timer(time_start) = timeo)
Can't you just check the value of err here instead of calling this
function again? That would also eliminate the race condition.
+ printf(Rx frame: QBMAN buffer release fails\n);
+
return;
}
@@ -195,11 +202,13 @@ static int ldpaa_eth_tx(struct eth_device *net_dev,
void *buf, int len)
error:
qbman_release_desc_clear(releasedesc);
qbman_release_desc_set_bpid(releasedesc, dflt_dpbp-dpbp_attr.bpid);
+ time_start = get_timer(0);
do {
/* Release buffer into the QBMAN */
err = qbman_swp_release(swp, releasedesc, buffer_start, 1);
- } while (err == -EBUSY);
+ } while (get_timer(time_start) timeo err == -EBUSY);
It looks like you are addressing the infinite loop you added in a
previous patch. Instead of making it tag along with this patch, you
should squash the _tx side into that original patch.
+ printf(TX data: QBMAN buffer release fails\n);
This message seems wrong. The release didn't necessarily fail. Only
the qbman_swp_dqrr_next() definitely failed here.
return err;
}
--
1.9.1
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
