From: J. William Campbell <jwilliamcampbell@comcast.net>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] i.MX51: FEC: Cache coherency problem?
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 07:36:32 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E259670.8030706@comcast.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E2548DE.6060705@aribaud.net>
On 7/19/2011 2:05 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Le 19/07/2011 10:43, Aneesh V a ?crit :
>
>>>> You would have to flush (before sending packets / starting external
>>>> memory-to-device DMA) and invalidate (before reading received packets /
>>>> after external device-to-memory DMA is done); using MMU and mapping
>>>> cached/non-cached areas is IMO overkill, and will hurt CPU accesses to
>>>> the xmit/receive buffers and descriptors.
>>> So, you say actually what I did while exploring the problem would have
>>> been a
>>> correct way of solving this problem?
>>>
>>> Like this:
>>>
>>> 587 flush_cache(&fec->tbd_base[fec->tbd_index], 4);
>> This is what is needed assuming the below is initiating a memory to
>> peripheral DMA. Is your buffer only 4 bytes long?
> Generally:
>
> - for sending data through a device that has its own, external, DMA
> engine, you'll obviously need to flush the data buffer(s) but also any
> DMA descriptors used by the engine, before you start the engine;
>
> - for rceiving, if you have to set up receive descriptors, you must
> flush that before telling the device to enter receive mode (so that the
> device reads the descriptors as you wrote them), and you should
> invalidate the receive buffers at the latest when the device signals
> that data has been received,
Hi All,
> or preferably long before (at the same time
> you flushed the read descriptor, so that cache-related actions are
> grouped in the same place in the code).
I think this last statement is incorrect. You should invalidate the
cache for the receive buffers just before you intend to reference them.
If you do it right after receive mode is entered, subsequent access to
items NEAR the receive buffer may reload the cache with receive buffer
data before the dma is done, re-creating the problem you are trying to
avoid. Also, I don't know if ARM cache is write-back or write -thru, but
if it is write-back, the only way to avoid problems is to allocate the
receive buffers on cache line boundaries, so no "nearby" writes can
cause something in the DMA buffer to be corrupted. If all receive
buffers are allocated on cache-line boundaries (both start and end of
each buffer), you can invalidate the cache "early" under the assumption
that there will be no read accesses to the read buffers themselves until
after DMA is complete. IMHO it is better, even in this case., to
invalidate cache after dma is done but before referencing the read data.
Best Regards,
Bill Campbell
>
> Amicalement,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-19 14:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-18 15:18 [U-Boot] i.MX51: FEC: Cache coherency problem? David Jander
2011-07-18 16:16 ` Aneesh V
2011-07-19 7:26 ` David Jander
2011-07-19 11:07 ` Matthias Weißer
2011-07-19 11:17 ` David Jander
2011-07-19 11:20 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-07-19 12:10 ` David Jander
2011-07-20 6:29 ` David Jander
2011-07-20 8:56 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-20 9:21 ` David Jander
2011-07-20 10:29 ` Aneesh V
2011-07-20 11:31 ` David Jander
2011-07-20 12:05 ` Aneesh V
2011-07-19 11:19 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-07-19 14:31 ` Matthias Weißer
2011-07-19 11:51 ` Aneesh V
2011-07-18 16:55 ` Stefano Babic
2011-07-19 7:44 ` David Jander
2011-07-19 8:21 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-19 8:37 ` David Jander
2011-07-19 8:43 ` Aneesh V
2011-07-19 8:58 ` David Jander
2011-07-19 9:11 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-19 11:50 ` Aneesh V
2011-07-19 11:42 ` Aneesh V
2011-07-19 9:05 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-19 14:36 ` J. William Campbell [this message]
2011-07-19 15:17 ` David Jander
2011-07-19 18:14 ` Anton Staaf
2011-07-19 20:11 ` J. William Campbell
2011-07-20 13:02 ` Albert ARIBAUD
[not found] ` <4E26DF9D.5070709@comcast.net>
[not found] ` <4E26E7AA.9070001@aribaud.net>
2011-07-20 15:36 ` J. William Campbell
2011-07-21 6:48 ` David Jander
2011-07-23 13:04 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-23 15:35 ` J. William Campbell
2011-07-20 8:37 ` Aneesh V
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=4E259670.8030706@comcast.net \
--to=jwilliamcampbell@comcast.net \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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