On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 11:52:19AM +0200, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> > > To go back to the driver code, the statements that ring a "bell" are:
> > >
> > > *(u32 *) (&tx_desc->ctrl.vlan_tag) |= ring->doorbell_qpn;
> > >
> > > This doesn't look right unless "doorbell_qpn" itself is alread
> > To go back to the driver code, the statements that ring a "bell" are:
> >
> > *(u32 *) (&tx_desc->ctrl.vlan_tag) |= ring->doorbell_qpn;
> >
> > This doesn't look right unless "doorbell_qpn" itself is already somewhat
> > in the appropriate byte order.
> This is something that supports m
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:38:56AM +0200, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-10-09 at 10:07 +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
>
> > > Well, first, what do you mean by "swapped" ? :-) But no, it won't for
> > > all intend and purpose, this is a copy routine, copy routines never
> > > swap, neither
On Sun, 2011-10-09 at 10:07 +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
> > Well, first, what do you mean by "swapped" ? :-) But no, it won't for
> > all intend and purpose, this is a copy routine, copy routines never
> > swap, neither do fifo accesses for example.
> When I say swapped, I mean not necessairliy by sof
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 10:00:54AM +0200, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-10-09 at 09:35 +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 09:25:18AM +0200, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 15:57 +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 10:15:0
On Sun, 2011-10-09 at 09:35 +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 09:25:18AM +0200, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 15:57 +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 10:15:02AM +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
> > >
> > > How about this patch - can you give it
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 09:25:18AM +0200, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 15:57 +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 10:15:02AM +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
> >
> > How about this patch - can you give it a try?
> >
> >
> > >From dee60547aa9e35a02835451d9e694cd80dd
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 15:10 +0100, David Laight wrote:
> horrid...
> 1) I'm not sure the caller expects the buffer to be corrupted.
> 2) It contains a lot of memory cycles.
> 3) It looked from the calls that this code is copying descriptors,
>so the transfer length is probably 1 or 2 words - so
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 15:57 +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 10:15:02AM +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
>
> How about this patch - can you give it a try?
>
>
> >From dee60547aa9e35a02835451d9e694cd80dd3072f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Eli Cohen
> Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 15:50:02 +02
On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 10:15 +0200, Eli Cohen wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 05:26:20PM -0300, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote:
>
> I believe we have an endianess problem here. The source buffer is in
> big endian - in x86 archs, it will rich the pci device unswapped since
> both x86 and pci
On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 17:26 -0300, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote:
> if (ring->bf_enabled && desc_size <= MAX_BF && !bounce &&
> !vlan_tag) {
> *(u32 *) (&tx_desc->ctrl.vlan_tag) |=
> ring->doorbell_qpn;
Could this have endianness problems ?
> op_own
On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 13:55 +, smitha.va...@wipro.com wrote:
>
> Hi Scoot,
>
> When I try to use a atomic varaible in my ISR I see a kernel crash .
> with mesage BUG: scheduling while atomic:
>
>
>
> Below is the code :
> My ISR
>
> irqreturn_t cpld_irq_handler(int irq, void * dev_id, st
On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 11:21 +, smitha.va...@wipro.com wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> I am able to register the IRQ now once I add the call irq_set_default_host in
> cpm2_pic.
This is a band-aid at best and will probably not be accepted upstream.
You should -really- describe your interrupt in the de
13 matches
Mail list logo