From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from bues.ch ([80.190.117.144]:53722 "EHLO bues.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753598Ab1HJQzt convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:55:49 -0400 Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:55:34 +0200 From: Michael =?UTF-8?B?QsO8c2No?= To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, "John W. Linville" , b43-dev@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] b43: fix DMA on some bugged hardware Message-ID: <20110810185534.5f4b9db9@milhouse> (sfid-20110810_185553_019065_1ED3E3D4) In-Reply-To: References: <1312992688-6976-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> <1312992688-6976-2-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> <20110810183339.7259d936@milhouse> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:45:57 +0200 Rafał Miłecki wrote: > W dniu 10 sierpnia 2011 18:33 użytkownik Michael Büsch napisał: > > On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:11:28 +0200 > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/dma.c b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/dma.c > >> index 0953ce1..9a2b678 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/dma.c > >> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/dma.c > >> @@ -174,7 +174,10 @@ static void op64_fill_descriptor(struct b43_dmaring *ring, > >>       addrhi = (((u64) dmaaddr >> 32) & ~SSB_DMA_TRANSLATION_MASK); > >>       addrext = (((u64) dmaaddr >> 32) & SSB_DMA_TRANSLATION_MASK) > >>           >> SSB_DMA_TRANSLATION_SHIFT; > >> -     addrhi |= ring->dev->dma.translation; > >> +     if (ring->dev->dma.translation_in_low) > >> +             addrlo |= ring->dev->dma.translation; > >> +     else > >> +             addrhi |= ring->dev->dma.translation; > >>       if (slot == ring->nr_slots - 1) > >>               ctl0 |= B43_DMA64_DCTL0_DTABLEEND; > >>       if (start) > >> @@ -656,10 +659,12 @@ static int alloc_initial_descbuffers(struct b43_dmaring *ring) > >>  static int dmacontroller_setup(struct b43_dmaring *ring) > >>  { > >>       int err = 0; > >> +     int tmp; > >>       u32 value; > >>       u32 addrext; > >>       u32 trans = ring->dev->dma.translation; > >>       bool parity = ring->dev->dma.parity; > >> +     u32 addrs[2]; > >> > >>       if (ring->tx) { > >>               if (ring->type == B43_DMA_64BIT) { > >> @@ -673,12 +678,14 @@ static int dmacontroller_setup(struct b43_dmaring *ring) > >>                       if (!parity) > >>                               value |= B43_DMA64_TXPARITYDISABLE; > >>                       b43_dma_write(ring, B43_DMA64_TXCTL, value); > >> -                     b43_dma_write(ring, B43_DMA64_TXRINGLO, > >> -                                   (ringbase & 0xFFFFFFFF)); > >> -                     b43_dma_write(ring, B43_DMA64_TXRINGHI, > >> -                                   ((ringbase >> 32) & > >> -                                    ~SSB_DMA_TRANSLATION_MASK) > >> -                                   | trans); > >> + > >> +                     addrs[0] = ringbase & 0xFFFFFFFF; > >> +                     addrs[1] = ringbase >> 32; > >> +                     tmp = ring->dev->dma.translation_in_low ? 0 : 1; > >> +                     addrs[tmp] &= ~SSB_DMA_TRANSLATION_MASK; > >> +                     addrs[tmp] |= trans; > >> +                     b43_dma_write(ring, B43_DMA64_TXRINGLO, addrs[0]); > >> +                     b43_dma_write(ring, B43_DMA64_TXRINGHI, addrs[1]); > >>               } else { > >>                       u32 ringbase = (u32) (ring->dmabase); > >> > >> @@ -710,12 +717,15 @@ static int dmacontroller_setup(struct b43_dmaring *ring) > >>                       if (!parity) > >>                               value |= B43_DMA64_RXPARITYDISABLE; > >>                       b43_dma_write(ring, B43_DMA64_RXCTL, value); > >> -                     b43_dma_write(ring, B43_DMA64_RXRINGLO, > >> -                                   (ringbase & 0xFFFFFFFF)); > >> -                     b43_dma_write(ring, B43_DMA64_RXRINGHI, > >> -                                   ((ringbase >> 32) & > >> -                                    ~SSB_DMA_TRANSLATION_MASK) > >> -                                   | trans); > >> + > >> +                     addrs[0] = ringbase & 0xFFFFFFFF; > >> +                     addrs[1] = ringbase >> 32; > >> +                     tmp = ring->dev->dma.translation_in_low ? 0 : 1; > >> +                     addrs[tmp] &= ~SSB_DMA_TRANSLATION_MASK; > >> +                     addrs[tmp] |= trans; > >> +                     b43_dma_write(ring, B43_DMA64_RXRINGLO, addrs[0]); > >> +                     b43_dma_write(ring, B43_DMA64_RXRINGHI, addrs[1]); > >> + > >>                       b43_dma_write(ring, B43_DMA64_RXINDEX, ring->nr_slots * > >>                                     sizeof(struct b43_dmadesc64)); > >>               } else { > >> @@ -1052,6 +1062,21 @@ static int b43_dma_set_mask(struct b43_wldev *dev, u64 mask) > >>       return 0; > >>  } > > > > > > This doesn't look correct to me for several reasons: > > > > In the fill-op the address is not masked correctly with the translation mask. > > In both the fill-op and both ring setups, the actual address extension bits > > are always taken from the address's high word. I guess the extension should > > be the low word bits for devices where we use the low word. That's the only > > thing that would make sense. But hey, it's not that we have sane hardware here. > > So this has to be checked. > > Ouch, yeah, you should be right (according to common sense of design). > > Unfortunately, on my machine, kernel provides low addresses for DMA purposes: > 0x1f310000 > 0x1f318000 > 0x1f31c000 > > Can I ask/hack kernel to offer b43 addresses starting with 0x4... or > 0x8... (or 0xc...)? I'm not sure I understand.. Are you actually saying that those shiny new devices are total crap in that their 64bit DMA engine can only do real-life-30bit, because they completely fucked up the extension bits? Did you try to fix the extension according to my suggestion? Does that break stuff? -- Greetings, Michael.