From: Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@barco.com>
To: linas@austin.ibm.com
Cc: linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org>
Subject: Re: PCI Memory mapping
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 16:48:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040325154845.GF3696@smtp.barco.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040324110814.E50148@forte.austin.ibm.com>
> Excuse my total ignorance on this topic, but ... is it possible that
> the DSP is using some sort of oddball bookmark mechanism to read the
> data?
Not at all, we're at the point that we appreciate external comments,
clues, ...
The DSP gets the PCI address, configures a DMA transfer and fetches the
data to some predefined memory location. There is not further
functionality (next to checking the counter in the memory for data
consistency purposes) because we want to verify and debug the technique.
> This would be a rather poor design decision on the part of whomever
> wrote the DSP code, but not out of the realms of impossible. (I've
> seen equally bizarre code in the past whose only excuse for existence
> was stupidity.) It could also be a bug in the DSP code. The fact
> that 'everything is OK after DSP acks' is telling: in the end, the
> DSP *did* do the right thing, by the time it ack'ed even if it did
> something weird while data was flying around.
The DSP code is fairly simple, but I would not put it past a DSP/Bios
bug, it has happened before (unfortunately). The annoying thing is that
we are not able to pinpoint a location where it is happening (on the DSP
or the PPC side). Next to this, I have a bit more confidence in the guy
writing the code than that :)
The only pattern we notice is that the first 8 words (32 bit words) are
fine, the following 24 words are not, the rest of the buffer is fine
(tested with buffers of 512, 1024, 2048 and 4096).
We did some further experimentation and the minimum of data we need to
read back after a DSP ACK is 97 bytes. You will note that 24*4=96. I
don't believe in coincidences :) If we read 96 bytes or less, we get the
corrupted data again... I even tested and tried to verify that the code
which is being used by the kernel is the one from the 2.4.17 mvl for
memory management and not 'tainted' code.
Anyway, this is a workaround until we have some more time to try to
figure out where the problem lies (PPC/PCI/Kernel/DSP) and what it is...
As ever, insights are welcome :-/
marc.
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-25 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-16 11:40 PCI Memory mapping Marc Leeman
2004-03-16 16:39 ` Jeff Angielski
2004-03-22 7:48 ` Marc Leeman
2004-03-22 11:02 ` Marc Leeman
2004-03-23 11:17 ` Marc Leeman
2004-03-23 16:01 ` Marc Leeman
2004-03-24 2:04 ` Michael R. Zucca
2004-03-24 0:04 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-03-24 12:26 ` Marc Leeman
2004-03-24 14:25 ` Marc Leeman
2004-03-24 17:08 ` linas
2004-03-25 15:48 ` Marc Leeman [this message]
2004-03-25 16:34 ` linas
2004-03-25 16:45 ` linas
2004-03-26 8:00 ` Marc Leeman
2004-03-30 19:49 ` Jeff Angielski
2004-03-31 15:56 ` Marc Leeman
2004-03-31 16:02 ` Marc Leeman
2004-04-01 12:33 ` Marc Leeman
2004-04-04 22:53 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-04-05 8:46 ` Adrian Cox
[not found] ` <20040402140130.GG22365@smtp.barco.com>
[not found] ` <1081175362.20952.30.camel@localhost.localdomain>
2004-04-06 6:21 ` Marc Leeman
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-04-07 7:15 Marc Leeman
2011-04-15 5:44 koteswararaom
2011-04-15 6:32 ` David Hawkins
2011-04-15 6:48 ` Michael Neuling
2025-04-07 14:55 PCI memory mapping Renaud Barbier
2025-04-08 9:54 ` Lucas Stach
2025-04-09 10:00 ` Renaud Barbier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040325154845.GF3696@smtp.barco.com \
--to=marc.leeman@barco.com \
--cc=linas@austin.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.