W dniu 26 lipca 2011 17:33 użytkownik Larry Finger <[email protected]> napisał: > On 07/26/2011 03:24 AM, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> >> W dniu 25 lipca 2011 23:54 użytkownik Rafał Miłecki<[email protected]> >> napisał: >>> >>> Now, the question: when for real we should use such a solution? >>> >>> Larry, could you check your driver? Can you see anything about this? >>> Is this maybe PCI (not PCIe!) specific? >> >> I've checked thread "Interesting 14e4:4321". It seems both: 14e4:4321 >> and 14e4:4322 are using PCI slot and both are not working in DMA mode. >> I start believing it's PCI specific. >> >> If you take a look at current ssb code and defines: >>> >>> if (ssb_read32(dev, SSB_TMSHIGH)& SSB_TMSHIGH_DMA64) >>> return SSB_PCIE_DMA_H32; >>> else >>> return SSB_PCI_DMA; >> >> You can see 0x80000000 (SSB_PCIE_DMA_H32) has actually "PCIE" in it's >> name. This can be true that 0x80000000 is *only* for *64-bit DMA* on >> *PCIe*. > > That is almost correct. This time I found it. The pseudo code is: > > dma_addr_lo = 0 > dma_addr_hi = 0 > if PCI || PCIe > if PCIe && 64-bit DMA > dma_addr_hi = 0x80000000 > else > if chipID is 0x4322, 43221, 43231, or 43222 > dma_addr_lo = 0x80000000 > else > dma_addr_lo = 0x40000000 <== your case > > Thus it is just a little more complicated than a PCI/PCIe split, as it also > depends on the chip ID. > > I'll add this to the specs.
Can you (anyone, not just Larry ;) ) give me some tip, how to implement this correctly? From programming POV. We should return two infos from ssb code now: 1) Routing bit 2) Address which should be used Should I add new function for this? Or create struct dma_translation_info with 2 fields? Or return array? Or...? -- Rafał _______________________________________________ b43-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/b43-dev
