Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:37:48 -0500 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: SATA_SIL on IXP425 workaround |
| |
On 01/21/2010 01:48 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On 01/20/2010 11:58 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> On 01/14/2010 10:59 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: >>> On Monday 09 November 2009 06:31:21 pm Krzysztof Halasa wrote: >>>> I'm trying to add a workaround for IXP4xx CPUs to SATA SIL driver. The >>>> problem is that IXP4xx CPUs (Intel's XScale (ARM) network-oriented >>>> processors) are unable to perform 8 and 16-bit read from PCI MMIO, they >>>> can only do a full 32-bit readl(); SIL chips respond to that with PCI >>>> abort. The workaround is to use 8 and 16-bit regular IO reads (inb/inw) >>>> instead (MMIO write is not a problem). >>>> >>>> For SIL3x12 the workaround is simple (attached) and it works on my >>>> 3512. >>>> I'm not sure about 3114 (the 4-port chip) - the PIO BARs have TF, CTL >>>> and BWDMA registers which are common to channels 0 and 2, and (the >>>> other >>>> set) to channels 1 and 3. Channel selection is done with bit 4 of >>>> device/head TF register, this is similar (same?) as PATA master/slave. >>>> Does that mean that I can simply treat channel 0 as PRI master, ch#2 as >>>> PRI slave, ch#1 as SEC master and ch#3 as SEC slave, and the SFF code >>>> will select the right device correctly? Does it need additional code? >>>> I don't have anything based on 3114. >>>> >>>> Note: the large PRD is not a problem here, the transfer can be started >>>> by MMIO write. Only reads are an issue. >>> >>> FWIW your patch is now in my atang tree (I'm aware that Jeff is working >>> on generic solution but in the meantime this non-intrusive patch allows >>> sata_sil to work on IXP425). >> >> I was asking an open question, is a generic solution possible? >> >> Something like the attached patch might work, due it is completely >> untested, and I did not verify that the BMDMA Status register is not >> stomped. Also, the additional ioread32() calls in bmdma start/stop are >> LIKELY to be unnecessary. > > As I suspected, there is a W1C register in there. But it does look > possible to do all-32-bit accesses.
It is definitely possible to do all 32-bit accesses... but that requires activating and exclusively using the command buffering feature, because direct 32-bit access to the taskfile registers will result in a 32-bit access to Data rather than the desired effect.
The chip docs are at http://gkernel.sourceforge.net/specs/sii/ for those unfamiliar with my doc archive.
Jeff
| |