[U-Boot] FW: [PATCH 1/2] drivers/net/designware, do an explicit memory access instead of implicit, re-written assignments to use readl() and writel(), all of this as preperation for making the driver able to work in a cached environment (I$D$ support).

Frank Dols Frank.Dols at synopsys.com
Fri Mar 1 11:05:41 CET 2013


 [[ ... to get attention again ... see below ...]]
On 2/8/2013 6:22 PM, Frank Dols wrote:
> Good afternoon Vipin and Albert,
> I where wondering, is there any review/update news on the patches I submitted a short while ago?
> Regards, Frank.
> Sorry, first excluded " u-boot at lists.denx.de" from this email to prevent from noice on mailing list.
>

There is no reason to remove the list. This is not  noise I believe. 
Infact by including the list, you are intimating other developers that such work would be available soon

Albert, do you think any different.

> Sorry, I have to clarify here a bit more.
> The descriptors are 16 bytes in length and a cache line is in most architectures more than 16 bytes in length (in our case either 32 or 64).
> This means that cached accesses is not an option for these descriptors. Background, two adjacent descriptors as be on one cache line may be owned by different entities (host cpu / network ip).

Yes, this is a problem and I can't think of a clean solution. Specially because u-boot (as of today) does not support non-cached memory

Albert?

> Explicit cache calls that we are added in patch 2/2 are meant for payload of the package. And these are made cache line aligned with patch 1/2.

Yes, that is what I thought

> Unfortunately we can't align the descriptors on cache line boundaries due to hardware limitations (for architectures with cache line longer than 16 bytes) !

Yes, I know that. The descriptors are 16 bytes and they need to be contiguous in memory

PS: I have not added the list but I strongly feel that this mail should also go to the uboot list

-Vipin

> With kind regards, greetings, Frank.
>
>



More information about the U-Boot mailing list