Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755302Ab2K1BAO (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Nov 2012 20:00:14 -0500 Received: from mailout39.mail01.mtsvc.net ([216.70.64.83]:36151 "EHLO n12.mail01.mtsvc.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752263Ab2K1BAK convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Nov 2012 20:00:10 -0500 Message-ID: <1354064401.2703.13.camel@thor> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] staging: fwserial: Add TTY-over-Firewire serial driver From: Peter Hurley To: Stefan Richter Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Alan Cox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 20:00:01 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20121128005846.0f1d4d5e@stein> References: <1350565015.23730.4.camel@thor> <55547e779e65e6865f18d537ef1a42191a4b7e46.1351817601.git.peter@hurleysoftware.com> <20121113003338.6aafd7c8@stein> <1352834072.16401.100.camel@thor> <20121114022522.633a44d4@stein> <1354041196.3284.121.camel@thor> <20121128005846.0f1d4d5e@stein> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.4-0build1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Authenticated-User: 125194 peter@hurleysoftware.com X-MT-ID: 8fa290c2a27252aacf65dbc4a42f3ce3735fb2a4 X-MT-INTERNAL-ID: 8fa290c2a27252aacf65dbc4a42f3ce3735fb2a4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3496 Lines: 65 On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 00:58 +0100, Stefan Richter wrote: > On Nov 27 Peter Hurley wrote: > > > > Currently, firewire-net sets an arbitrary address handler length of > > > > 4096. This works because the largest AR packet size the current > > > > firewire-ohci driver handles is 4096 (value of MAX_ASYNC_PAYLOAD) + > > > > header/trailer. Note that firewire-ohci does not limit card->max_receive > > > > to this value. > > > > > > > > So if the ohci driver changes to handle 8K+ AR packets and the hardware > > > > supports it, these address handler windows will be too small. > > > > > > While the IEEE 1394:2008 link layer specification (section 6) provides for > > > asynchronous packet payloads of up to 16384 bytes (table 6-4), the IEEE > > > 1394 beta mode port specification (section 13) only allows up to 4096 > > > bytes (table 16-18). And alpha mode is of course limited to 2048 bytes. > > > > > > So, asynchronous packet payloads greater than 4096 bytes are out of scope > > > of the current revision of IEEE 1394. > > > > You should look at this 1394ta.org video > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVXNvXHNQTY of DAP Technologies S1600 > > OHCI controllers running S1600 cameras using beta cables. > > I don't know the details of their implementation, but I suppose they conform > with the 1394 beta mode port specification. Which in turn means that their > S1600 solution (and by extrapolation, their S3200 prototypes) comply with a > maximum asynchronous packet payload of 4096 bytes. Citing IEEE 1394-2008: > > >>> > Table 16-18———Maximum payload size for Beta data packets > Data rate | Maximum asynchronous payload size | Maximum isochronous payload > | (bytes) | (bytes) > ----------+-----------------------------------+---------------------------- > S100 | 512 | 1024 > S200 | 1024 | 2048 > S400 | 2048 | 4096 > S800 | 4096 | 8192 > S1600 | 4096 | 16384 > S3200 | 4096 | 32768 > <<< > > (Alpha mode payload limits are the same as the S100...S400 subset of beta mode. > In IEEE 1394b-2002, the table number is 16-3.) > > You can of course define registers (or better termed: buffers) which are larger > than what can be atomically read or written, or atomically compared-swapped; > IOW which are larger than what can be accessed in a single transaction, if such > registers or buffers are useful. But if you particularly need a register which > is just large enough to accommodate the largest possible inbound block write > transaction which complies with IEEE 1394, and you don't know the peer's > capability and the speeds of all intermediary cable hops, then > fw_card.max_receive is the number that you need. Or you ignore the cards actual > capability and just allocate 4096 bytes. Thanks for the clarification. I need to update link_speed_to_max_payload() now. ;) Plus I should just renew my IEEE membership so I can get the 1394-2008 spec without having to saw my arm off. -- 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/