All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue
@ 2016-01-20 11:15 Stephane Grosjean
  2016-01-20 14:11 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Stephane Grosjean @ 2016-01-20 11:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-can Mailing List; +Cc: Stephane Grosjean

This patch installs a workaround when the driver detects one of the
following PEAK-System CAN interfaces, running a firmware < v1.3.0:

PCAN-PCI Express 1/2/4 CAN; DeviceID 0x0003
PCAN-PCI/104 Express 1/2/4 CAN; DeviceID 0x0007
PCAN-miniPCIe 1/2 CAN; DeviceID 0x0008
PCAN-PCI Express OEM 1/2/4 CAN; DeviceID 0x0009
PCAN-ExpressCard 34 1 CAN; DeviceID 0x000A

This fixes potential loss of one tx frame in Linux SMP when some other
task does another Command Register write (e.g. Release Receive Buffer)
in between the triggering Tx Request and the next Sample Point.

This workaround is useless thus *NOT* installed when the firmware
has been upgraded to v1.3.0 or higher, nor if the CAN interface is equipped
with true SJA1000 controller(s).

Signed-off-by: Stephane Grosjean <s.grosjean@peak-system.com>
---
 drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c b/drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c
index 131026f..84f7d3a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c
+++ b/drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c
@@ -30,6 +30,15 @@
 
 #include "sja1000.h"
 
+#define VERSION_REG1		0x40
+#define VERSION_REG2		0x44
+
+#define VERSION_REG2_MASK	0xfff0
+#define PCAN_PCI_FW(x, y, z)	((((u16 )(x) & 0xf) << 12) | \
+				 (((u16 )(y) & 0xf) << 8)  | \
+				 ((      (z) & 0xf) << 4))
+#define PCAN_PCI_FW_VER(v)	((v) & VERSION_REG2_MASK)
+
 MODULE_AUTHOR("Stephane Grosjean <s.grosjean@peak-system.com>");
 MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Socket-CAN driver for PEAK PCAN PCI family cards");
 MODULE_SUPPORTED_DEVICE("PEAK PCAN PCI/PCIe/PCIeC miniPCI CAN cards");
@@ -540,6 +549,19 @@ static void peak_pci_write_reg(const struct sja1000_priv *priv,
 	writeb(val, priv->reg_base + (port << 2));
 }
 
+/* This function adds a delay after each access to CMR to workaround potential
+ * loss of frame in SMP Linux for FPGA based boards not upgraded to FW >= 1.3.0.
+ */
+static void peak_pci_write_reg_1_2_x(const struct sja1000_priv *priv,
+				     int port, u8 val)
+{
+	peak_pci_write_reg(priv, port, val);
+
+	/* add a bigger delay */
+	if (port == SJA1000_CMR)
+		udelay(10);
+}
+
 static void peak_pci_post_irq(const struct sja1000_priv *priv)
 {
 	struct peak_pci_chan *chan = priv->priv;
@@ -559,6 +581,7 @@ static int peak_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *ent)
 	void __iomem *cfg_base, *reg_base;
 	u16 sub_sys_id, icr;
 	int i, err, channels;
+	u32 v1, v2 = 0;
 
 	err = pci_enable_device(pdev);
 	if (err)
@@ -612,6 +635,12 @@ static int peak_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *ent)
 	/* Leave parport mux mode */
 	writeb(0x04, cfg_base + PITA_MISC + 3);
 
+	v1 = readl(cfg_base + VERSION_REG1);
+	if (v1) {
+		/* FPGA card */
+		v2 = readl(cfg_base + VERSION_REG2);
+	}
+
 	icr = readw(cfg_base + PITA_ICR + 2);
 
 	for (i = 0; i < channels; i++) {
@@ -628,7 +657,10 @@ static int peak_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *ent)
 		priv->reg_base = reg_base + i * PEAK_PCI_CHAN_SIZE;
 
 		priv->read_reg = peak_pci_read_reg;
-		priv->write_reg = peak_pci_write_reg;
+		if (v1 && (PCAN_PCI_FW_VER(v2) < PCAN_PCI_FW(1, 3, 0)))
+			priv->write_reg = peak_pci_write_reg_1_2_x;
+		else
+			priv->write_reg = peak_pci_write_reg;
 		priv->post_irq = peak_pci_post_irq;
 
 		priv->can.clock.freq = PEAK_PCI_CAN_CLOCK;
-- 
1.9.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue
  2016-01-20 11:15 [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue Stephane Grosjean
@ 2016-01-20 14:11 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
  2016-01-20 14:29   ` Stephane Grosjean
  2016-01-20 14:51 ` Andri Yngvason
  2016-02-23 16:53 ` Andri Yngvason
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Marc Kleine-Budde @ 2016-01-20 14:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephane Grosjean, linux-can Mailing List

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2487 bytes --]

On 01/20/2016 12:15 PM, Stephane Grosjean wrote:
> This patch installs a workaround when the driver detects one of the
> following PEAK-System CAN interfaces, running a firmware < v1.3.0:

Is the problem fixed on FW >= 1.3.0? Is it possible to update the
firmware? If so, what about printing a warning message about known
problem with the firmware?

> PCAN-PCI Express 1/2/4 CAN; DeviceID 0x0003
> PCAN-PCI/104 Express 1/2/4 CAN; DeviceID 0x0007
> PCAN-miniPCIe 1/2 CAN; DeviceID 0x0008
> PCAN-PCI Express OEM 1/2/4 CAN; DeviceID 0x0009
> PCAN-ExpressCard 34 1 CAN; DeviceID 0x000A
> 
> This fixes potential loss of one tx frame in Linux SMP when some other
> task does another Command Register write (e.g. Release Receive Buffer)
> in between the triggering Tx Request and the next Sample Point.
> 
> This workaround is useless thus *NOT* installed when the firmware
> has been upgraded to v1.3.0 or higher, nor if the CAN interface is equipped
> with true SJA1000 controller(s).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephane Grosjean <s.grosjean@peak-system.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c b/drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c
> index 131026f..84f7d3a 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c
> @@ -30,6 +30,15 @@
>  
>  #include "sja1000.h"
>  
> +#define VERSION_REG1		0x40
> +#define VERSION_REG2		0x44
> +
> +#define VERSION_REG2_MASK	0xfff0

Nitpick:
Please add PCAN_ prefixes to the defines.

> +#define PCAN_PCI_FW(x, y, z)	((((u16 )(x) & 0xf) << 12) | \
> +				 (((u16 )(y) & 0xf) << 8)  | \
> +				 ((      (z) & 0xf) << 4))
> +#define PCAN_PCI_FW_VER(v)	((v) & VERSION_REG2_MASK)
> +
>  MODULE_AUTHOR("Stephane Grosjean <s.grosjean@peak-system.com>");
>  MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Socket-CAN driver for PEAK PCAN PCI family cards");
>  MODULE_SUPPORTED_DEVICE("PEAK PCAN PCI/PCIe/PCIeC miniPCI CAN cards");
> @@ -540,6 +549,19 @@ static void peak_pci_write_reg(const struct sja1000_priv *priv,
>  	writeb(val, priv->reg_base + (port << 2));
>  }

Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                  | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Industrial Linux Solutions        | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Vertretung West/Dortmund          | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686  | http://www.pengutronix.de   |


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 455 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue
  2016-01-20 14:11 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
@ 2016-01-20 14:29   ` Stephane Grosjean
  2016-01-20 14:33     ` Marc Kleine-Budde
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Stephane Grosjean @ 2016-01-20 14:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Marc Kleine-Budde; +Cc: linux-can Mailing List


Le 20/01/2016 15:11, Marc Kleine-Budde a écrit :
> On 01/20/2016 12:15 PM, Stephane Grosjean wrote:
>> This patch installs a workaround when the driver detects one of the
>> following PEAK-System CAN interfaces, running a firmware < v1.3.0:
> Is the problem fixed on FW >= 1.3.0? Is it possible to update the
> firmware? If so, what about printing a warning message about known
> problem with the firmware?

Yes, problem is fixed with 1.3.0.
And yes, firmware can be updated.
What kind of warning message are you talking about? Do you mean that 
peak_pci could dev_warn() a text msg to inform about the fact that the 
current FW is able to be upgraded?

If yes, since peak_pci prints a single info line per CAN channel, what 
would you prefer?

- the same warning about the old FW version, for each candev, something 
like:

[ 2200.129168] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: can0 at 
reg_base=0xffffc90000678000 cfg_base=0xffffc90000676000 irq=22 FW=1.2.0 
should be updated
[ 2200.129307] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: can1 at 
reg_base=0xffffc90000678400 cfg_base=0xffffc90000676000 irq=22 FW=1.2.0 
should be updated

- or a single warning msg for the hardware device, something like:

[ 2200.129168] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: Warning: FW v1.2.0 needs a 
workaround; update is available
[ 2200.129168] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: can0 at 
reg_base=0xffffc90000678000 cfg_base=0xffffc90000676000 irq=22
[ 2200.129307] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: can1 at 
reg_base=0xffffc90000678400 cfg_base=0xffffc90000676000 irq=22

?

Stéphane

--
PEAK-System Technik GmbH
Sitz der Gesellschaft Darmstadt - HRB 9183 
Geschaeftsfuehrung: A.Gach, U.Wilhelm
--

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue
  2016-01-20 14:29   ` Stephane Grosjean
@ 2016-01-20 14:33     ` Marc Kleine-Budde
  2016-01-21 17:51       ` Oliver Hartkopp
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Marc Kleine-Budde @ 2016-01-20 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephane Grosjean; +Cc: linux-can Mailing List

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2172 bytes --]

On 01/20/2016 03:29 PM, Stephane Grosjean wrote:
> 
> Le 20/01/2016 15:11, Marc Kleine-Budde a écrit :
>> On 01/20/2016 12:15 PM, Stephane Grosjean wrote:
>>> This patch installs a workaround when the driver detects one of the
>>> following PEAK-System CAN interfaces, running a firmware < v1.3.0:
>> Is the problem fixed on FW >= 1.3.0? Is it possible to update the
>> firmware? If so, what about printing a warning message about known
>> problem with the firmware?
> 
> Yes, problem is fixed with 1.3.0.
> And yes, firmware can be updated.
> What kind of warning message are you talking about? Do you mean that 
> peak_pci could dev_warn() a text msg to inform about the fact that the 
> current FW is able to be upgraded?
> 
> If yes, since peak_pci prints a single info line per CAN channel, what 
> would you prefer?
> 
> - the same warning about the old FW version, for each candev, something 
> like:
> 
> [ 2200.129168] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: can0 at 
> reg_base=0xffffc90000678000 cfg_base=0xffffc90000676000 irq=22 FW=1.2.0 
> should be updated
> [ 2200.129307] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: can1 at 
> reg_base=0xffffc90000678400 cfg_base=0xffffc90000676000 irq=22 FW=1.2.0 
> should be updated
> 
> - or a single warning msg for the hardware device, something like:
> 
> [ 2200.129168] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: Warning: FW v1.2.0 needs a 
> workaround; update is available

One per hardware device is enough.
"Warning: FW v1.2.0 workaround active; Please update device Firmeware."

...and a webpage displaying this message, so that you will find it.
Maybe even add a link to the website in the commit message.

> [ 2200.129168] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: can0 at 
> reg_base=0xffffc90000678000 cfg_base=0xffffc90000676000 irq=22
> [ 2200.129307] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: can1 at 
> reg_base=0xffffc90000678400 cfg_base=0xffffc90000676000 irq=22

Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                  | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Industrial Linux Solutions        | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Vertretung West/Dortmund          | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686  | http://www.pengutronix.de   |


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 455 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue
  2016-01-20 11:15 [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue Stephane Grosjean
  2016-01-20 14:11 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
@ 2016-01-20 14:51 ` Andri Yngvason
  2016-02-23 16:53 ` Andri Yngvason
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Andri Yngvason @ 2016-01-20 14:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephane Grosjean; +Cc: linux-can Mailing List

Hi,

I wouldn't say it's a "potential" frame loss issue. It's a confirmed TX frame
loss issue.

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:15:32PM +0100, Stephane Grosjean wrote:
> This patch installs a workaround when the driver detects one of the
> following PEAK-System CAN interfaces, running a firmware < v1.3.0:
> 
> PCAN-PCI Express 1/2/4 CAN; DeviceID 0x0003
> PCAN-PCI/104 Express 1/2/4 CAN; DeviceID 0x0007
> PCAN-miniPCIe 1/2 CAN; DeviceID 0x0008
> PCAN-PCI Express OEM 1/2/4 CAN; DeviceID 0x0009
> PCAN-ExpressCard 34 1 CAN; DeviceID 0x000A
> 
> This fixes potential loss of one tx frame in Linux SMP when some other
> task does another Command Register write (e.g. Release Receive Buffer)
> in between the triggering Tx Request and the next Sample Point.
> 
> This workaround is useless thus *NOT* installed when the firmware
Nitpick: I don't think that you mean to say that the patch you're posting is
useless. Perhaps you want to rephrase. ;)

> has been upgraded to v1.3.0 or higher, nor if the CAN interface is equipped
> with true SJA1000 controller(s).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephane Grosjean <s.grosjean@peak-system.com>

Reported-by: Andri Yngvason <andri.yngvason@marel.com>

> ---
>  drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c b/drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c
> index 131026f..84f7d3a 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c
> @@ -30,6 +30,15 @@
[...]
>  static void peak_pci_post_irq(const struct sja1000_priv *priv)
>  {
>  	struct peak_pci_chan *chan = priv->priv;
> @@ -559,6 +581,7 @@ static int peak_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *ent)
>  	void __iomem *cfg_base, *reg_base;
>  	u16 sub_sys_id, icr;
>  	int i, err, channels;
> +	u32 v1, v2 = 0;
>  
>  	err = pci_enable_device(pdev);
>  	if (err)
> @@ -612,6 +635,12 @@ static int peak_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *ent)
>  	/* Leave parport mux mode */
>  	writeb(0x04, cfg_base + PITA_MISC + 3);
>  
> +	v1 = readl(cfg_base + VERSION_REG1);
Nitpick: It's easier on my internal parser if you make this
	is_fpga = !!readl(cfg_base + VERSION_REG1);

> +	if (v1) {
> +		/* FPGA card */
> +		v2 = readl(cfg_base + VERSION_REG2);
... and this
		fpga_version = readl(cfg_base + VERSION_REG2);

> +	}
> +
[...]

Thanks,
Andri

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue
  2016-01-20 14:33     ` Marc Kleine-Budde
@ 2016-01-21 17:51       ` Oliver Hartkopp
  2016-01-22  9:10         ` Stephane Grosjean
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Oliver Hartkopp @ 2016-01-21 17:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephane Grosjean; +Cc: linux-can Mailing List

Hi Stephane,

On 01/20/2016 03:33 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On 01/20/2016 03:29 PM, Stephane Grosjean wrote:

>>
>> [ 2200.129168] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: Warning: FW v1.2.0 needs a 
>> workaround; update is available
> 
> One per hardware device is enough.
> "Warning: FW v1.2.0 workaround active; Please update device Firmeware."
> 
> ...and a webpage displaying this message, so that you will find it.
> Maybe even add a link to the website in the commit message.
> 

searching for a potential firmware update on the PEAK Website

	http://www.peak-system.com/Firmware.180.0.html?&L=1

I did not find anything about the PCIe Hardware.

Will there be a Linux tool to apply the firmware update too?
I don't have any PCIe slots on Windows machines anymore 8-)

Best regards,
Oliver


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue
  2016-01-21 17:51       ` Oliver Hartkopp
@ 2016-01-22  9:10         ` Stephane Grosjean
  2016-04-08  5:36           ` Oliver Hartkopp
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Stephane Grosjean @ 2016-01-22  9:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Oliver Hartkopp; +Cc: linux-can Mailing List

Hello Oliver,

At the moment,  we think about how best to proceed.
We've got one tool that is able to do the update, but we want to reduce 
risks at their minimum.

Keep intouch!

Regards,

Stéphane

Le 21/01/2016 18:51, Oliver Hartkopp a écrit :
> Hi Stephane,
>
> On 01/20/2016 03:33 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>> On 01/20/2016 03:29 PM, Stephane Grosjean wrote:
>>> [ 2200.129168] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: Warning: FW v1.2.0 needs a
>>> workaround; update is available
>> One per hardware device is enough.
>> "Warning: FW v1.2.0 workaround active; Please update device Firmeware."
>>
>> ...and a webpage displaying this message, so that you will find it.
>> Maybe even add a link to the website in the commit message.
>>
> searching for a potential firmware update on the PEAK Website
>
> 	http://www.peak-system.com/Firmware.180.0.html?&L=1
>
> I did not find anything about the PCIe Hardware.
>
> Will there be a Linux tool to apply the firmware update too?
> I don't have any PCIe slots on Windows machines anymore 8-)
>
> Best regards,
> Oliver
>

--
PEAK-System Technik GmbH
Sitz der Gesellschaft Darmstadt - HRB 9183 
Geschaeftsfuehrung: A.Gach, U.Wilhelm
--

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue
  2016-01-20 11:15 [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue Stephane Grosjean
  2016-01-20 14:11 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
  2016-01-20 14:51 ` Andri Yngvason
@ 2016-02-23 16:53 ` Andri Yngvason
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Andri Yngvason @ 2016-02-23 16:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephane Grosjean; +Cc: linux-can Mailing List

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:15:32PM +0100, Stephane Grosjean wrote:
> This patch installs a workaround when the driver detects one of the
> following PEAK-System CAN interfaces, running a firmware < v1.3.0:
> 
> PCAN-PCI Express 1/2/4 CAN; DeviceID 0x0003
> PCAN-PCI/104 Express 1/2/4 CAN; DeviceID 0x0007
> PCAN-miniPCIe 1/2 CAN; DeviceID 0x0008
> PCAN-PCI Express OEM 1/2/4 CAN; DeviceID 0x0009
> PCAN-ExpressCard 34 1 CAN; DeviceID 0x000A
> 
> This fixes potential loss of one tx frame in Linux SMP when some other
> task does another Command Register write (e.g. Release Receive Buffer)
> in between the triggering Tx Request and the next Sample Point.
> 
> This workaround is useless thus *NOT* installed when the firmware
> has been upgraded to v1.3.0 or higher, nor if the CAN interface is equipped
> with true SJA1000 controller(s).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephane Grosjean <s.grosjean@peak-system.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/can/sja1000/peak_pci.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
[...]

Hi Stéphane,

Is this still being worked on?

I can test this if you like. I just need to have the firmware upgrade.

Regards,
Andri

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue
  2016-01-22  9:10         ` Stephane Grosjean
@ 2016-04-08  5:36           ` Oliver Hartkopp
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Oliver Hartkopp @ 2016-04-08  5:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephane Grosjean; +Cc: linux-can Mailing List

Hello Stephane,

anything new to this FPGA topic?

Best regards,
Oliver

ps. I've seen that a ucan-based PCIe card was presented on CAN-CiA Newsletter.
Do you already have a plan for a mainline driver for it?
http://can-newsletter.org/hardware/host-interfaces/160331_fast-canfd-for-pci-express_peak/

On 01/22/2016 10:10 AM, Stephane Grosjean wrote:
> Hello Oliver,
> 
> At the moment,  we think about how best to proceed.
> We've got one tool that is able to do the update, but we want to reduce risks
> at their minimum.
> 
> Keep intouch!
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Stéphane
> 
> Le 21/01/2016 18:51, Oliver Hartkopp a écrit :
>> Hi Stephane,
>>
>> On 01/20/2016 03:33 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>>> On 01/20/2016 03:29 PM, Stephane Grosjean wrote:
>>>> [ 2200.129168] peak_pci 0000:05:01.0: Warning: FW v1.2.0 needs a
>>>> workaround; update is available
>>> One per hardware device is enough.
>>> "Warning: FW v1.2.0 workaround active; Please update device Firmeware."
>>>
>>> ...and a webpage displaying this message, so that you will find it.
>>> Maybe even add a link to the website in the commit message.
>>>
>> searching for a potential firmware update on the PEAK Website
>>
>>     http://www.peak-system.com/Firmware.180.0.html?&L=1
>>
>> I did not find anything about the PCIe Hardware.
>>
>> Will there be a Linux tool to apply the firmware update too?
>> I don't have any PCIe slots on Windows machines anymore 8-)
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Oliver
>>
> 
> -- 
> PEAK-System Technik GmbH
> Sitz der Gesellschaft Darmstadt - HRB 9183 Geschaeftsfuehrung: A.Gach, U.Wilhelm
> -- 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2016-04-08  5:36 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-01-20 11:15 [PATCH] can/peak_pci: fix FPGA potential frame loss issue Stephane Grosjean
2016-01-20 14:11 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2016-01-20 14:29   ` Stephane Grosjean
2016-01-20 14:33     ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2016-01-21 17:51       ` Oliver Hartkopp
2016-01-22  9:10         ` Stephane Grosjean
2016-04-08  5:36           ` Oliver Hartkopp
2016-01-20 14:51 ` Andri Yngvason
2016-02-23 16:53 ` Andri Yngvason

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.