lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] IBM Lanstreamer bugfixes
Date
From
> effects.  I tested by removing all the delays and instead putting 
> something like:
> writew(val, addr);
> (void) read(addr);
>
> instead, to flush the PCI cache. Things seem to be happy.
>
> Is this the best way to make sure the PCI cache is flushed for writes that
> need to happen immediately? I don't see many other drivers doing it...

In many cases its not needed. Devices tend to be structured to avoid having
to force pci writes - that by definition is a CPU stall and loses you marks
in the benchmarketing and the pretty zdnet graphs.

There other thing it can also hide is pci write merging bugs (which some
devices have). For example at least one ethernet chip fails if you do

writew(mac_addr, ioport+foo);
writew(mac_addr+2, ioport+foo+2);
writew(mac_addr+4, ioport+foo+4);

because the writes get merged and a chip bug causes a bus hang on the 32bit
write of the mac address. In that case its not the posting being masked but
the merging.

Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:18    [W:0.045 / U:2.276 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site