On Sat, 10 Jul 2021, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>
> The last 2 patches are included for Mark, but I don't plan to merge
>
> them without Finn's Ack, and apparently they require more work.
>
I tested the patch series both with and without the last 2 patches. Both
builds worked fine with my NetBSD/arc, Linux/mipsel and Linux/m68k guests.
Tested-by: Finn Thain <fth...@linux-m68k.org>
I have no objection to patch 8/8 ("dp8393x: don't force 32-bit register
access"). I asked Mark to explain why it was a bug fix (since it didn't
change QEMU behaviour in my tests) but when I looked into it I found that
he is quite right, the patch does fix a theoretical bug.
My only objection to patch 7/8 ("dp8393x: Rewrite dp8393x_get() /
dp8393x_put()") was that it could be churn.
If I'm right that the big_endian flag should go away, commit b1600ff195
("hw/mips/jazz: specify correct endian for dp8393x device") has already
taken mainline in the wrong direction and amounts to churn.
I have the same reservations about patch 6/8 ("dp8393x: Store CRC using
device configured endianess"). Perhaps that should be NOTFORMERGE too
(even though it too a theoretical bug fix).
Is there a good way to avoid using big_endian for storing the CRC and the
other DMA operations?
BTW, if you see "sn0: receive buffers exhausted" occasionally logged by
the NetBSD 9.2 kernel, accompanied by packet loss, it's not a regression
in QEMU. I first observed it last year when stress testing dp8393x with
NetBSD 5.1. I believe this to be an old NetBSD sn driver bug because Linux
is unaffected.
