On 9 May 2016 at 11:07, Ryan Harkin <[email protected]> wrote: > On 9 May 2016 at 10:22, Mark Rutland <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 10:43:45AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>> On 6 May 2016 at 19:19, Mark Rutland <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > The LAN9118 driver uses memory fences in a novel but erroneous fashion, >>> > due to >>> > a misunderstanding of some under-commented code. This series fixes these >>> > erroneous uses, documenting the unusual requirements of the LAN9118 chip >>> > that >>> > lead us to this situation, and introduces new helpers to handle this in a >>> > more >>> > consistent fashion. >>> > >>> > The LAN9118 datasheet is publicly available at: >>> > >>> > http://www.microchip.com/wwwproducts/en/LAN9118 >>> > >>> >>> Thanks a lot for getting to the bottom of this! I particularly like >>> the way how you folded the required delays into the MMIO read/write >>> functions, which makes the top level code a lot cleaner. >>> >>> I can't test this, but the code looks fine to me. >>> > > I'll test it later today on TC2 and Juno R0/1/2. But I like the look > of it, it seems like a huge improvement. >
This seems to work on TC2 and Juno R0, R1 and R2, although I'm not 100% sure it's reliable, so I need to do more testing. When attempting to install debian over the network, my Juno R1 has just reported: LAN9118: There was an error transmitting. TxStatus=0x00008401:- No carrier - Packet tx was deferred The 2nd attempt seems to be working fine. Juno R0 and R2 seem happy enough. >>> Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]> >> >> Cheers! >> >> FWIW, I've tested each patch on Juno R1, and I haven't seen any >> regression as a result of this. That said, I haven't been able to >> trigger issues even without this series. >> > > That'll be the problem I have too - it works fine for me as it is. I > guess Sudeep (CC'd) should give it a test too. > > >> There's another latent bug that this doesn't solve, in that if the PHY >> negotiates full-duplex operation (at 100Mb/s or 10Mb/s), but that >> appears to be unrelated. >> >> Thanks, >> Mark. _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
