From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753804AbcGVKXN (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2016 06:23:13 -0400 Received: from ni.piap.pl ([195.187.100.4]:37072 "EHLO ni.piap.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753298AbcGVKXK (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2016 06:23:10 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 495 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 22 Jul 2016 06:23:10 EDT From: khalasa@piap.pl (Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Ha=C5=82asa?=) To: "Lino Sanfilippo" Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Aw: BUG: Wrong dma queue handling in ixp4 driver References: Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 12:14:51 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Lino Sanfilippo's message of "Tue, 19 Jul 2016 13:31:49 +0200") Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-KLMS-Rule-ID: 1 X-KLMS-Message-Action: clean X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Lua-Profiles: 99720 [Jul 22 2016] X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Version: 5.5.9.33 X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Envelope-From: khalasa@piap.pl X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Rate: 0 X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Status: not_detected X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Method: none X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Moebius-Timestamps: 4240911, 4240943, 4240878 X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Info: LuaCore: 506 506 6ef799202ba50e109a38175aefe4f931da291fb7, Auth:dkim=none X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Interceptor-Info: scan successful X-KLMS-AntiPhishing: Clean, 2016/07/21 14:54:29 X-KLMS-AntiVirus: Kaspersky Security 8.0 for Linux Mail Server, version 8.0.1.721, bases: 2016/07/22 05:15:00 #7393726 X-KLMS-AntiVirus-Status: Clean, skipped Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Lino, "Lino Sanfilippo" writes: >> maybe I miss something, but the ixp4 ethernet driver seems to handle dma pools >> in a wrong way: In init_queues() it creates a dma pool for descriptors and then >> only allocates a single descriptor from this pool. The author seems to assume the whole >> table has been allocated already, since after that the complete pool size is zeroed: >> > > Sorry, I indeed missed something. The allocation is correct. A pool is not required, though, > since only one chunk is allocated. Not really: there is one pool for all ports, but each port uses a separate desc_tab (allocated from that pool). -- Krzysztof Halasa Industrial Research Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP Al. Jerozolimskie 202, 02-486 Warsaw, Poland