From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Melnichenko <andrew@daynix.com>
Cc: dmitry.fleytman@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] e1000e: Added ICR clearing by corresponding IMS bit.
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2020 10:14:48 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <080ffdec-8fc3-f856-48d2-06c671ea900a@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABcq3pGy1yPiEusHnQMwFOwa3hbqXaMWGUi0TnrMLhetMXzq9w@mail.gmail.com>
On 2020/6/2 上午12:47, Andrew Melnichenko wrote:
> As I understand it, the e1000e.c was implemented by 82574L
> spec(https://www.intel.com/content/dam/doc/datasheet/82574l-gbe-controller-datasheet.pdf).
> In the same spec there is 10.2.4 paragraph which provides more details
> when ICR should be cleared.
>
> • Case 1 - Interrupt Mask register equals 0x0000 (mask all): ICR
> content is cleared.
> • Case 2 - Interrupt was asserted (ICR.INT_ASSERT=1) and auto mask
> is active: ICR
> content is cleared, and the IAM register is written to the IMC
> register.
> • Case 3 - Interrupt was not asserted (ICR.INT_ASSERT=0): Read has
> no side affect.
>
Thanks for the pointer, so it looks to me the current implementation is
fine ?
static uint32_t
e1000e_mac_icr_read(E1000ECore *core, int index)
{
uint32_t ret = core->mac[ICR];
trace_e1000e_irq_icr_read_entry(ret);
if (core->mac[IMS] == 0) {
trace_e1000e_irq_icr_clear_zero_ims();
core->mac[ICR] = 0;
}
// This is the case 1)
if ((core->mac[ICR] & E1000_ICR_ASSERTED) &&
(core->mac[CTRL_EXT] & E1000_CTRL_EXT_IAME)) {
trace_e1000e_irq_icr_clear_iame();
core->mac[ICR] = 0;
trace_e1000e_irq_icr_process_iame();
e1000e_clear_ims_bits(core, core->mac[IAM]);
}
// This is the case 2) and case 3)
trace_e1000e_irq_icr_read_exit(core->mac[ICR]);
e1000e_update_interrupt_state(core);
return ret;
}
Thanks
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 10:35 AM Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com
> <mailto:jasowang@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>
> On 2020/5/29 下午3:18, Jason Wang wrote:
> >
> > On 2020/5/13 下午7:31, andrew@daynix.com
> <mailto:andrew@daynix.com> wrote:
> >> From: Andrew Melnychenko <andrew@daynix.com
> <mailto:andrew@daynix.com>>
> >>
> >> Buglink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1707441
> >> Added ICR clearing if there is IMS bit - according to the note by
> >> section 13.3.27 of the 8257X developers manual.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Melnychenko <andrew@daynix.com
> <mailto:andrew@daynix.com>>
> >> ---
> >> hw/net/e1000e_core.c | 10 ++++++++++
> >> hw/net/trace-events | 1 +
> >> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/hw/net/e1000e_core.c b/hw/net/e1000e_core.c
> >> index d5676871fa..10212d7932 100644
> >> --- a/hw/net/e1000e_core.c
> >> +++ b/hw/net/e1000e_core.c
> >> @@ -2624,6 +2624,16 @@ e1000e_mac_icr_read(E1000ECore *core,
> int index)
> >> e1000e_clear_ims_bits(core, core->mac[IAM]);
> >> }
> >> + /*
> >> + * PCIe* GbE Controllers Open Source Software Developer's
> Manual
> >> + * 13.3.27 Interrupt Cause Read Register
> >> + */
> >> + if ((core->mac[ICR] & E1000_ICR_ASSERTED) &&
> >> + (core->mac[ICR] & core->mac[IMS])) {
> >> + trace_e1000e_irq_icr_clear_icr_bit_ims(core->mac[ICR],
> >> core->mac[IMS]);
> >> + core->mac[ICR] = 0;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >
> >
> > Hi Andrew:
> >
> > So my comments still. I think we need to implement 82574l
> behavior (if
> > you go through e1000e.c all chapters it mentioned is for 82574l
> > datasheet not the one you pointed to me).
> >
> > And actually the 82574l behavior is much more simpler.
>
>
> To be more specific.
>
> See chapter 7.4.5 which describes the ICR clearing.
>
> It has three methods for clearing: auto-clear, clear-on-write and
> clear-on-read.
>
> And in the part of "Read to clear" it said:
>
> """
> All bits in the ICR register are cleared on a read to ICR.
>
> """
>
> So there's no need to IMS and other stuffs here.
>
> Thanks
>
>
> >
> > Thanks
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-02 2:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-13 11:31 [PATCH 0/1] e1000e: Added ICR clearing by corresponding IMS bit andrew
2020-05-13 11:31 ` [PATCH 1/1] " andrew
2020-05-29 7:18 ` Jason Wang
2020-05-29 7:35 ` Jason Wang
2020-06-01 16:47 ` Andrew Melnichenko
2020-06-02 2:14 ` Jason Wang [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-05-13 11:28 [PATCH 0/1] " andrew
2020-05-13 11:28 ` [PATCH 1/1] " andrew
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=080ffdec-8fc3-f856-48d2-06c671ea900a@redhat.com \
--to=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=andrew@daynix.com \
--cc=dmitry.fleytman@gmail.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).