Hi Eugen,
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 4:50 PM Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com wrote:
On 17.12.2020 07:22, Padmarao Begari - I30397 wrote:
Hi Eugen,
This series of patches break my side of work(patches) so you need to create patches after my patches are going into master branch because my patches are already reviewed and tested.
Hi,
Could you please detail the breakage ?
The breakage is the fdt relocation disabled in the board environment variables so I have removed it and enabled fdt relocation in PATCH v9.
Regards Padmarao
I saw a pull request with your patches that was NAK-ed, if your two macb patches are tested and reviewed I could apply them to the atmel tree as well and send them, if your PR is delayed. But we are interested to have our sama7g5 series pushed as well, so we need to know if it's ok on your side, and what is wrong with the sama7g5 series.
Thanks! Eugen
Regards Padmarao
*From:* Eugen Hristev - M18282 Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com *Sent:* Wednesday, December 16, 2020 12:24 PM *To:* anup.patel@wdc.com anup.patel@wdc.com; bin.meng@windriver.com bin.meng@windriver.com; Padmarao Begari - I30397 Padmarao.Begari@microchip.com *Cc:* Claudiu Beznea - M18063 Claudiu.Beznea@microchip.com; joe.hershberger@ni.com joe.hershberger@ni.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de u-boot@lists.denx.de *Subject:* Re: [PATCH 1/6] net: macb: use dummy descriptor for RBQP On 03.12.2020 11:25, Claudiu Beznea wrote:
In case of multiple queues on RX side the queue scheduler will try to use all the available configured queues (with descriptors having TX_USED bit cleared). If at least one RBQP points to a descriptor with a valid used bit configuration then the reception may block as this may point to any memory. To avoid this scenario all the queues (except queue zero) were disabled by setting DMA descriptors with used bit set on proper RBQP. The driver anyway uses only queue 0 for TX/RX.
Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea claudiu.beznea@microchip.com
Hi Anup, Bin, Padmarao,
I noticed on the mailing list that you have been actively working and testing the Macb driver on various platforms, we have this series outstanding and I want to make sure that it does not break anything on your side, so it would be appreciated if you could have a look or test it before it goes into master branch.
Thanks ! Eugen
drivers/net/macb.c | 4 +++- drivers/net/macb.h | 2 ++ 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/macb.c b/drivers/net/macb.c index b80a259ff757..836eb85ec96a 100644 --- a/drivers/net/macb.c +++ b/drivers/net/macb.c @@ -732,8 +732,10 @@ static int gmac_init_multi_queues(struct
macb_device *macb)
flush_dcache_range(macb->dummy_desc_dma, macb->dummy_desc_dma + ALIGN(MACB_TX_DUMMY_DMA_DESC_SIZE, PKTALIGN));
for (i = 1; i < num_queues; i++)
for (i = 1; i < num_queues; i++) { gem_writel_queue_TBQP(macb, macb->dummy_desc_dma, i - 1);gem_writel_queue_RBQP(macb, macb->dummy_desc_dma, i - 1);} return 0;}
diff --git a/drivers/net/macb.h b/drivers/net/macb.h index 9b16383eba46..28c7fe306883 100644 --- a/drivers/net/macb.h +++ b/drivers/net/macb.h @@ -768,5 +768,7 @@ #define GEM_RX_CSUM_CHECKED_MASK 2 #define gem_writel_queue_TBQP(port, value, queue_num) \ writel((value), (port)->regs + GEM_TBQP(queue_num)) +#define gem_writel_queue_RBQP(port, value, queue_num) \
writel((value), (port)->regs + GEM_RBQP(queue_num))#endif /* __DRIVERS_MACB_H__ */