From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from buildserver.ru.mvista.com (unknown [213.79.90.228]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C531DDE0F for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:05:44 +1100 (EST) Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 21:05:43 +0300 From: Anton Vorontsov To: Joakim Tjernlund Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ucc_geth: Rework the TX logic. Message-ID: <20090326180543.GA2406@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> References: <1238072077-27044-1-git-send-email-Joakim.Tjernlund@transmode.se> <1238072077-27044-2-git-send-email-Joakim.Tjernlund@transmode.se> <20090326133918.GA27085@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 In-Reply-To: Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, leoli@freescale.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: avorontsov@ru.mvista.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 05:43:25PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: [...] > > bd == ugeth->confBd[txQ] > > and > > !in_be32((u32 __iomem *)(bd+4)) > > > > Are not equivalent wrt. speed. MMIO accessors should be rather > > slow comparing to normal memory. > > Yes, I know. I did it this way because I something broke under stress > when ugeth->confBd[txQ] instead. The ucc_geth_tx() and > ucc_geth_start_xmit() > gets out of sync somehow. Would be great if you could investigate it more. Maybe there is a serious bug somewhere, or maybe you're introducing another (yet hidden) bug... -- Anton Vorontsov email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2