>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Garzik [mailto:jeff@xxxxxxxxxx] >Sent: 2009年8月15日 4:10 >To: Ed Lin - PTU >Cc: James.Bottomley; linux-scsi; Promise_Linux >Subject: Re: [PATCH] stex: Add reset code for st_yel > > >Ed Lin wrote: >> Add reset related code for st_yel. >> 1. Set the SS_H2I_INT_RESET bit. >> 2. Wait for the SS_MU_OPERATIONAL flag. This is also part of >> normal handshake process so move it to handshake routine. >> 3. Continue handshake with the firmware. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ed Lin <ed.lin@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> >> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/stex.c b/drivers/scsi/stex.c >> index 8d2a95c..b57f92f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/scsi/stex.c >> +++ b/drivers/scsi/stex.c >> @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ enum { >> OIS = 0x30, /* MU_OUTBOUND_INTERRUPT_STATUS */ >> OIM = 0x3c, /* MU_OUTBOUND_INTERRUPT_MASK */ >> >> + YIOA_STATUS = 0x00, >> YH2I_INT = 0x20, >> YINT_EN = 0x34, >> YI2H_INT = 0x9c, >> @@ -108,6 +109,10 @@ enum { >> >> SS_HEAD_HANDSHAKE = 0x80, >> >> + SS_H2I_INT_RESET = 0x100, >> + >> + SS_MU_OPERATIONAL = 0x80000000, >> + >> STEX_CDB_LENGTH = 16, >> STATUS_VAR_LEN = 128, >> >> @@ -884,7 +889,7 @@ static void stex_ss_mu_intr(struct st_hba *hba) >> tag = (u16)value; >> if (unlikely(tag >= hba->host->can_queue)) { >> printk(KERN_WARNING DRV_NAME >> - "(%s): invalid tag\n", >pci_name(hba->pdev)); >> + "(%s): invalid tag\n", >pci_name(hba->pdev)); >> continue; >> } >> >> @@ -1040,16 +1045,28 @@ static int stex_ss_handshake(struct >st_hba *hba) >> void __iomem *base = hba->mmio_base; >> struct st_msg_header *msg_h; >> struct handshake_frame *h; >> - __le32 *scratch = hba->scratch; >> + __le32 *scratch; >> u32 data; >> unsigned long before; >> int ret = 0; >> >> - h = (struct handshake_frame *)(hba->alloc_rq(hba)); >> - msg_h = (struct st_msg_header *)h - 1; >> + before = jiffies; >> + while ((readl(base + YIOA_STATUS) & SS_MU_OPERATIONAL) == 0) { >> + if (time_after(jiffies, before + MU_MAX_DELAY * HZ)) { >> + printk(KERN_ERR DRV_NAME >> + "(%s): firmware not operational\n", >> + pci_name(hba->pdev)); >> + return -1; >> + } >> + rmb(); >> + msleep(1); >> + } > >hmmmmm. Is that rmb() really necessary? It does not appear to be so. > >At worst, the rmb should occur immediately after the loop, no? > >ACK everything else. > > Jeff > > > Do you mean rmb() is not needed for readl()? I checked the x86 version of readl() and it seems to be so. If so I will come up with a new patch removing this thing. Thanks, Ed Lin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
