From: Jan Weitzel <J.Weitzel@phytec.de>
To: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: cpsw: invalidate complete buffer
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 08:35:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150302073547.GA2844@lws-weitzel2@phytec.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1425044718.2673.8.camel@pengutronix.de>
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 02:45:18PM +0100, Lucas Stach wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 27.02.2015, 14:39 +0100 schrieb Lucas Stach:
> > Am Freitag, den 27.02.2015, 14:14 +0100 schrieb Jan Weitzel:
> > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 12:47:24PM +0100, Lucas Stach wrote:
> > > > Am Freitag, den 27.02.2015, 10:56 +0100 schrieb Jan Weitzel:
> > > > > Without invalidating the complete buffer before giving it to
> > > > > dma_inv_range, we got strange packets.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > This is most likely not the correct fix. If this helps then our
> > > > dma_inv_range functions aren't working properly, which would be really
> > > > bad. How do those "strange packets" look like?
> > > >
> > > We saw the problem with tftp transfers of a 76 byte image. Debug print in
> > > tftp_handler
> > >
> > > good:
> > > tftp_handler: len:76 blocksize:1432 to fifo
> > > 00000000: 06 08 ba de 7d 27 e1 2c 52 2f cf 77 e0 d3 23 da ....}'.,R/.w..#.
> > > 00000010: 62 d4 42 3e 03 20 3a c2 51 aa 51 15 73 be 9e 21 b.B>. :.Q.Q.s..!
> > > 00000020: 03 ac 78 a9 e3 4f cd 4d 6d ba 93 fe 83 dc fe 82 ..x..O.Mm.......
> > > 00000030: bb f8 24 29 6e 6f 53 1c 91 52 4b 77 1b 72 ff a0 ..$)noS..RKw.r..
> > > 00000040: 5b 98 1c 20 28 09 0f 4c 93 3c 22 08 [.. (..L.<".
> > >
> > > bad:
> > > tftp_handler: len:76 blocksize:1432 to fifo:
> > > 00000000: 06 08 ba de 7d 27 e1 2c 52 2f cf 77 e0 d3 23 da ....}'.,R/.w..#.
> > > 00000010: 62 d4 6b 73 69 7a 65 00 31 34 33 32 00 b0 1b d1 b.ksize.1432....
> > > 00000020: 5b d4 78 a9 e3 4f cd 4d 6d ba 93 fe 83 dc fe 82 [.x..O.Mm.......
> > > 00000030: bb f8 24 29 6e 6f 53 1c 91 52 4b 77 1b 72 ff a0 ..$)noS..RKw.r..
> > > 00000040: 5b 98 1c 20 28 09 0f 4c 93 3c 22 08 [.. (..L.<".
> > >
> > >
> > > The ethernet package has 122 Bytes and the error in the received file is on
> > > offset 18. The data "b.ksize.1432" comes also from tftp packets.
> > >
> > This doesn't look like a problem to invalidate the cache, but more like
> > writeback of old cachelines while the hardware owns the buffer. Can you
> > try the series "Phasing out direct usage of asm/mmu.h on ARM" and see if
> > this still happens there? If I'm correct this series should fix this
> > problem.
> >
> > I'll send an updated version of this series in the evening, but you
> > should be able to correct the typo in cpsw.c yourself for testing. :)
>
> Or try this patch, which should do the same as the new cache handling,
> but may be acceptable for master.
Your patch works and invalidating after reading makes sense ;)
Can we take this for master? I'll test the series.
Tested-by: Jan Weitzel <j.weitzel@phytec.de>
>
> ------------------------>8--------------------------------------------
> From f96aec8bd87ac29247617bdcfab41048b942e899 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
> Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 14:41:46 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] net: cpsw: prevent stray cache writeback
>
> The cache should be invalidated when transfering ownership of a buffer
> to the device. Otherwise the writeback of dirty cache lines can
> corrupt the hardware written data.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
> ---
> drivers/net/cpsw.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/cpsw.c b/drivers/net/cpsw.c
> index 799fac89a2f3..301b8a9dfde5 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/cpsw.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/cpsw.c
> @@ -888,6 +888,7 @@ static int cpsw_recv(struct eth_device *edev)
> while (cpdma_process(priv, &priv->rx_chan, &buffer, &len) >= 0) {
> dma_inv_range((ulong)buffer, (ulong)buffer + len);
> net_receive(edev, buffer, len);
> + dma_inv_range((ulong)buffer, (ulong)buffer + len);
> cpdma_submit(priv, &priv->rx_chan, buffer, PKTSIZE);
> }
>
> --
> 2.1.4
> --
> Pengutronix e.K. | Lucas Stach |
> Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
>
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-02 7:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-27 9:56 Jan Weitzel
2015-02-27 11:47 ` Lucas Stach
2015-02-27 13:14 ` Jan Weitzel
2015-02-27 13:39 ` Lucas Stach
2015-02-27 13:45 ` Lucas Stach
2015-03-02 7:35 ` Jan Weitzel [this message]
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=20150302073547.GA2844@lws-weitzel2@phytec.de \
--to=j.weitzel@phytec.de \
--cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=l.stach@pengutronix.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