Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] scsi: lpfc: use memcpy_toio instead of writeq | From | James Smart <> | Date | Sat, 24 Feb 2018 14:24:59 -0800 |
| |
About to post a patch to fix. Rather than fidgeting with the copy routine, I want to go back to what we originally proposed - writeq() on 64bit, writel() on 32-bit.
-- james
On 2/23/2018 1:02 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 4:36 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: >> @@ -138,12 +137,10 @@ lpfc_sli4_wq_put(struct lpfc_queue *q, union lpfc_wqe *wqe) >> if (q->phba->sli3_options & LPFC_SLI4_PHWQ_ENABLED) >> bf_set(wqe_wqid, &wqe->generic.wqe_com, q->queue_id); >> lpfc_sli_pcimem_bcopy(wqe, temp_wqe, q->entry_size); >> - if (q->dpp_enable && q->phba->cfg_enable_dpp) { >> + if (q->dpp_enable && q->phba->cfg_enable_dpp) >> /* write to DPP aperture taking advatage of Combined Writes */ >> - tmp = (uint8_t *)wqe; >> - for (i = 0; i < q->entry_size; i += sizeof(uint64_t)) >> - writeq(*((uint64_t *)(tmp + i)), q->dpp_regaddr + i); >> - } >> + memcpy_toio(tmp, q->dpp_regaddr, q->entry_size); >> + >> /* ensure WQE bcopy and DPP flushed before doorbell write */ >> wmb(); >> > Not sure where we are with the question of whether memcpy_toio > is a good replacement or not, but further build testing showed that > my patch was completely broken in more than one way: > > I mixed up the source and destination arguments, and I used > the uninitialized 'tmp' instead of 'wqe'. Don't try this patch. > > Arnd
| |