From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: "Moore, Eric" <Eric.Moore@lsi.com>
Cc: "Prakash, Sathya" <Sathya.Prakash@lsi.com>,
"Desai, Kashyap" <Kashyap.Desai@lsi.com>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>, Milton Miller <miltonm@bga.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
"paulus@samba.org" <paulus@samba.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] mpt2sas: remove the use of writeq, since writeq is not atomic
Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 07:30:18 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1305754218.7481.0.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4565AEA676113A449269C2F3A549520F80B66280@cosmail03.lsi.com>
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 09:35 -0600, Moore, Eric wrote:
> I worked the original defect a couple months ago, and Kashyap is now
> getting around to posting my patch's.
>
> This original defect has nothing to do with PPC64. The original
> problem was only on x86. It only became a problem on PPC64 when I
> tried to fix the original x86 issue by copying the writeq code from
> the linux headers, then it broke PPC64. I doubt that broken patch
> was ever posted. Anyways, back to the original defect. The reason it
> because a problem for x86 is because the kernel headers had a
> implementation of writeq in the arch/x86 headers, which means our
> internal implementation of writeq is not being used. The writeq
> implementation in the kernel is total wrong for arch/x86 because it
> doesn't not have spin locks, and if two processor simultaneously doing
> two separate 32bit pci writes, then what is received by controller
> firmware is out of order. This change occurs between Red Hat RHEL5
> and RHEL6. In RHEL5, this writeq was not implemented in arch/x86
> headers, and our driver internal implementation of write was used.
You may also want to look at Milton's comments, it looks like the way
you do init_completion followed immediately by wait_completion is racy.
You should init the completion before you do the IO that will eventually
trigger complete() to be called.
Cheers,
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-18 21:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-04 11:53 [PATCH 1/3] mpt2sas: remove the use of writeq, since writeq is not atomic Kashyap, Desai
2011-05-17 7:16 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-18 4:07 ` Desai, Kashyap
2011-05-18 4:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2011-05-18 4:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2011-05-18 4:23 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-18 4:23 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-18 7:00 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-05-18 7:00 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-05-18 8:23 ` Milton Miller
2011-05-18 8:23 ` Milton Miller
2011-05-18 15:35 ` Moore, Eric
2011-05-18 15:35 ` Moore, Eric
2011-05-18 18:31 ` Milton Miller
2011-05-18 18:31 ` Milton Miller
2011-05-18 18:31 ` Milton Miller
2011-05-18 19:11 ` Moore, Eric
2011-05-18 19:11 ` Moore, Eric
2011-05-18 19:11 ` Moore, Eric
2011-05-19 4:08 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2011-05-19 4:08 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2011-05-19 4:46 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-19 4:46 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-19 5:36 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-05-19 5:36 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-05-19 8:35 ` [PATCH 1/3] mpt2sas: remove the use of writeq, since writeq isnot atomic David Laight
2011-05-19 8:35 ` David Laight
2011-05-19 8:35 ` David Laight
2011-05-19 4:16 ` [PATCH 1/3] mpt2sas: remove the use of writeq, since writeq is not atomic Roland Dreier
2011-05-19 4:16 ` Roland Dreier
2011-05-19 5:34 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-05-19 5:34 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-05-19 18:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-19 18:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-19 23:54 ` [PATCH] x86: Remove 32-bit versions of readq()/writeq() Roland Dreier
2011-05-20 1:15 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2011-05-20 8:05 ` Desai, Kashyap
2011-05-20 11:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-20 12:03 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-18 21:30 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2011-05-18 22:05 ` [PATCH 1/3] mpt2sas: remove the use of writeq, since writeq is not atomic Moore, Eric
2011-05-18 22:05 ` Moore, Eric
2011-05-18 8:04 ` [PATCH 1/3] mpt2sas: remove the use of writeq, since writeq isnot atomic David Laight
2011-05-18 8:04 ` David Laight
2011-05-18 5:45 ` [PATCH 1/3] mpt2sas: remove the use of writeq, since writeq is not atomic Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-05-18 5:45 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1305754218.7481.0.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=Eric.Moore@lsi.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=Kashyap.Desai@lsi.com \
--cc=Sathya.Prakash@lsi.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=miltonm@bga.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.