From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Schmitz Subject: Re: EtherNat drivers (was: Re: Atari ROM port ISA) Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 09:50:31 +1200 Message-ID: <4FB815A7.3030206@gmail.com> References: <4FB5FD8E.7030400@gmail.com> <4FB71C30.70609@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:52327 "EHLO mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754144Ab2ESVug (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 May 2012 17:50:36 -0400 Received: by dady13 with SMTP id y13so5232513dad.19 for ; Sat, 19 May 2012 14:50:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?David_G=E1lvez?= Cc: Michael Schmitz , Geert Uytterhoeven , linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org David, > That's not that great - I think I can get similar speeds with the EtherNEC. > Do you know how to use netcat? > > No, I've never used it, but I can learn :-) I'll send you what I used in my tests (reading from /dev/zero on one end, writing to /dev/null on the other). > To have something to be compared to, these are the speed values under > MiNT with the same file, MiNT as ftp server: > > Transferring is around 1.1 MB/s > Receiving is around 630 KB/s That's more like it. > I wonder if the culprit of the low transfer values under Linux is the > driver. I mean, for me here under Linux everything seems very slow, > long booting time, install a packet with apt-get also takes very long. > Don't you think that this issue of kernel only able to be run from > ST-Ram is the culprit here? When a module is installed where is > loaded into the ST-Ram or TT-Ram? I don't honestly know - I't think it would be TT-RAM though. Kernel load times and response times have degraded progressively since the 2.4 series. On the same hardware. >> I've never seen MiNT sources for the EtherNAT USB. Can I download that >> somewhere to check how the register access is done there? >> > http://sparemint.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/freemint/sys/usb/src.km/ucd/ethernat/#dirlist I'll take a look at that. > The good news is that the routines to access the data bus of the > ISP116x chip are almost the same in both drivers. > Take a look at the changes I did in the functions > write_ptddata_to_fifo and read_ptddata_from_fifo in the MiNT driver. > Also in functions pack_fifo and unpack_fifo there are changes > regarding swapping bytes Thanks, I don't think we've got to anything in relation to the PTD data yet (that uses __raw_inw on Linux which still may have endianness issues). >> The ISP1160 is a little endian device, as is the SMC91C111. For the 91C111, >> the driver swaps bytes in word or longword transfers; there's no hardware >> byte swap apparently. For the ISP116x driver, the bus is assumed to be >> little endian and the driver swaps all word transfers. >> >> I'll change that to use non-swapped accessors, let's see how that goes. >> > Consider also the function isp116x_write_addr in isp116x.h, this > function shouldn't swap the bytes to write the register addresses to > the bus because is going to be done by EtherNat hardware. I think > Linux driver is writing wrong register addresses because this. No, I've removed the byte swapping from both read and write accessors. Register numbers should be OK that way. >> Byte swapping makes the chip ID come out as 0010. It should be something >> like 61xx. I'll send the new module anyway, maybe your result is different. >> > I get the same as you. Still hope for my EtherNAT then :-) I'll poke around some more and post what patches I have for USB. Thanks yet again, Michael