Hi Greg, On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 04:39:05PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: > Hi Philippe, > > On 09/10/12 19:07, Philippe De Muyter wrote: >> [CCing lkml, linux-ppc, netdev, linux-m68k] >> >> Hello kernel sources architects >> >> I have a working driver for the m54xx FEC ethernet driver that I >> would like to integrate in the kernel tree. Problems are that >> - this driver needs an associated DMA driver (provided by FreeScale) >> wich is not dma-engine enabled >> - they're are already many fec drivers in the kernel tree, and >> at least one, fec_mpc52xx.c, seems to be very similar (information >> below), to the one for the mcf54xx, except it uses a differently >> named associated DMA driver (BestComm/SmartDma/SDMA) which is also >> not dma-engine enabled, and even kept hidden in /arch/powerpc where >> it is inaccessible when compiling for m68k. The underlying DMA part >> from Freescale however seems similar to the one used in the >> m54xx. (again, see information below) >> >> So, now I am lost, what should I do ? >> >> The current state of my patches >> [http://mailman.uclinux.org/pipermail/uclinux-dev/2012-September/052147.html] >> is pushing the freescale provided MCD_DMA dma driver to /drivers/dma, >> without adding the dma-engine compatibility layer, and adding the specific >> fec_m54xx ethernet driver to /drivers/net/ethernet/freescale > > Do you get any responses? > I didn't see any...
No, and none also about my simpler patch moving arch/powerpc/sysdev/bestcomm to drivers/dma/bestcomm (except a private and useful one telling me how to set '-M' option as default for 'git format-patch'), but at least this simpler patch seems to be in a wait bucket at http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/list/. Regards Philippe PS: -M as default for 'git format-patch': put [diff] renames = true in .git/config > > Regards > Greg > > > >> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 04:12:44PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: >>> Hi Philippe, >>> >>> On 05/10/12 01:03, Philippe De Muyter wrote: >>>> On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 04:56:01PM +0200, Philippe De Muyter wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 11:33:32PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> My biggest concern is the amount of MCD/DMA support code. And it is >>>>>> all done quite differently to everything else in the kernel. We may >>>>>> get a bit of push back from kernel folk who look after DMA. >>>>> >>>>> Actually, there is already a similar code in >>>>> arch/powerpc/sysdev/bestcomm >>>>> (also from freescale, maybe an identical part, but I did not find any >>>>> usable doc), but the powerpc folks kept that hidden in the arch/powerpc >>>>> tree, instead of installing it in drivers/dma. >>>> >>>> The MCD DMA or DMA FEC code from freescale has a comment implying that >>>> this >>>> was first used in the MPC8220 part. And Montavista has a MPC8220 port, >>>> but >>>> I did not find it, so I do not know where they installed the MCD DMA >>>> driver. >>> >>> Ok, looks like there is a bit a variance in all this. >> >> I also began to read the mpc5200 user's guide parts about the fec and >> BestComm/SmartDma/SDMA (not sure which one is the official FreeScale name) >> and they look very similar, but not identical, to their m54xx >> counterparts. >> >> It seems possible to make the fec_mpc52xx.c driver work for the m54xx >> but that needs at least: >> - moving some files or part of them from /arch/powerpc/sysdev and >> /arch/powerpc/include/asm to /drivers/dma and /include/linux, >> - renaming the fec_mpc52xx files to a more sensible name, >> - providing out_be32 and in_be32 in /arch/m68k/include/asm/io.h, >> - and then unifying the interface to BestComm/SmartDma/SDMA and MCD_DMA >> in mcf_52xx.c. >> >> An additional problem is that the freescale docs for powerpcs and for >> coldfires do not use the same mnemonics for the same registers. >> >> e.g. FEC registers >> offset MPC5200 MCF5484 >> ====== ======= ======= >> 000 FEC_ID n/a >> 004 IEVENT EIR >> 008 IMASK EIMR >> 010 R_DES_ACTIVE n/a >> 014 X_DES_ACTIVE n/a >> 024 ECNTRL ECR >> 040 MII_DATA MDATA >> 044 MII_SPEED MSCR >> 064 MIB_CONTROL MIBC >> 084 R_CNTRL RCR >> 088 R_HASH RHR >> 0C4 X_CNTRL TCR >> 0E4 PADDR1 PALR >> 0E8 PADDR2 PAHR >> 0EC OP_PAUSE OPD >> 118 IADDR1 IAUR >> 11C IADDR1 IALR >> 120 GADDR1 GAUR >> 124 GADDR2 GALR >> 144 X_WMRK FECTFWR >> 184 RFIFO_DATA FECRFDR >> 188 RFIFO_STATUS FECRFSR >> 18C RFIFO_CONTROL FECRFCR >> 190 RFIFO_LRF_PTR FECRLRFP >> 194 RFIFO_LWF_PTR FECRLWFP >> 198 RFIFO_ALARM FECRFAR >> 19C RFIFO_RDPTR FECRFRP >> 1A0 RFIFO_WRPTR FECRFWP >> 1A4 TFIFO_DATA FECTFDR >> 1A8 TFIFO_STATUS FECTFSR >> 1AC TFIFO_CONTROL FECTFCR >> 1B0 TFIFO_LRF_PTR FECTLRFP >> 1B4 TFIFO_LWF_PTR FECTLWFP >> 1B8 TFIFO_ALARM FECTFAR >> 1BC TFIFO_RDPTR FECTFRP >> 1C0 TFIFO_WRPTR FECTFWP >> 1C4 RESET_CNTRL FECFRST >> 1C8 XMIT_FSM FECCTCWR >> >>> Probably the best thing to do is post the patches on the linux kernel >>> mailing list then, asking for direction on a dma driver. >>> >>> I have no problem with it going into the arch/m68k area. So that is >>> always an option. >> >> For the dma engines, the similarity is also obvious. For example, find >> below side by side mpc52xx and m54xx definitions for the >> main DMA registers : >> >> from mpc52xx.h from MCD_dma.h >> /* SDMA */ /* MCD_DMA */ >> struct mpc52xx_sdma { struct dmaRegs { >> u32 taskBar; /* 0x00 */ u32 taskbar; >> u32 currentPointer; /* 0x04 */ u32 currPtr; >> u32 endPointer; /* 0x08 */ u32 endPtr; >> u32 variablePointer; /* 0x0c */ u32 varTablePtr; >> >> u8 IntVect1; /* 0x10 */ u16 dma_rsvd0; >> u8 IntVect2; /* 0x11 */ >> u16 PtdCntrl; /* 0x12 */ u16 ptdControl; >> >> u32 IntPend; /* 0x14 */ u32 intPending; >> u32 IntMask; /* 0x18 */ u32 intMask; >> >> u16 tcr[16]; /* 0x1c .. 0x3a */ u16 taskControl[16]; >> >> u8 ipr[32]; /* 0x3c .. 0x5b */ u8 priority[32]; >> >> u32 cReqSelect; /* 0x5c */ u32 initiatorMux; >> u32 task_size0; /* 0x60 */ u32 taskSize0; >> u32 task_size1; /* 0x64 */ u32 taskSize1; >> u32 MDEDebug; /* 0x68 */ u32 dma_rsvd1; >> u32 ADSDebug; /* 0x6c */ u32 dma_rsvd2; >> u32 Value1; /* 0x70 */ u32 debugComp1; >> u32 Value2; /* 0x74 */ u32 debugComp2; >> u32 Control; /* 0x78 */ u32 debugControl; >> u32 Status; /* 0x7c */ u32 debugStatus; >> u32 PTDDebug; /* 0x80 */ u32 ptdDebug; >> }; }; _______________________________________________ uClinux-dev mailing list uClinux-dev@uclinux.org http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org To unsubscribe see: http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev
