From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Andreas Mohr <andi@lisas.de>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Purcareata Bogdan <b43198@freescale.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] PPC: MPIC: necessary readback after EOI?
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 15:43:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1420641795.5830.31.camel@kernel.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150105174616.GA3159@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de>
On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 18:46 +0100, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > I was curious why the mpic_cpu_read(MPIC_INFO(CPU_WHOAMI)) was there in
> > the first place and if it's still needed. If it's still required, I
> > guess a better approach is to eliminate the call only if the kernel is
> > running on the KVM guest side, where the MPIC is emulated and no longer
> > requires a readback.
>
> "Why not?"
>
> A mechanism being "emulated"/"virtual" or not
> may not necessarily be much of a distinction (if at all!).
> The readback might be required
> to properly fulfill all requirements
> of a full state change protocol specification,
> which might easily be the case for both RS(*) and virtual hardware.
> And especially for virtual hardware
> such a "readback" event
> might be an extremely important "end of transaction" marker
> which may often be needed for freeing of temporary resources etc.
In that case it was purely something we added after trial and error to
correct a problem, it's not specified as necessary. Basically it's about
making the store synchronous to the MPIC logic. It's definitely not
necessary on an emulated implementation.
> I'm talking out of my *ss without any MPIC specifics here
> (and especially not why the readback there actually is needed -
> if that doesn't happen to be the case for PCI Posting reasons or some such),
> but it's just intended as food for thought :)
>
> *) Real Silicon (rather than RL - Real Life)
>
> HTH,
>
> Andreas Mohr
> --
> 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/
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Andreas Mohr <andi@lisas.de>
Cc: Purcareata Bogdan <b43198@freescale.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] PPC: MPIC: necessary readback after EOI?
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 15:43:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1420641795.5830.31.camel@kernel.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150105174616.GA3159@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de>
On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 18:46 +0100, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > I was curious why the mpic_cpu_read(MPIC_INFO(CPU_WHOAMI)) was there in
> > the first place and if it's still needed. If it's still required, I
> > guess a better approach is to eliminate the call only if the kernel is
> > running on the KVM guest side, where the MPIC is emulated and no longer
> > requires a readback.
>
> "Why not?"
>
> A mechanism being "emulated"/"virtual" or not
> may not necessarily be much of a distinction (if at all!).
> The readback might be required
> to properly fulfill all requirements
> of a full state change protocol specification,
> which might easily be the case for both RS(*) and virtual hardware.
> And especially for virtual hardware
> such a "readback" event
> might be an extremely important "end of transaction" marker
> which may often be needed for freeing of temporary resources etc.
In that case it was purely something we added after trial and error to
correct a problem, it's not specified as necessary. Basically it's about
making the store synchronous to the MPIC logic. It's definitely not
necessary on an emulated implementation.
> I'm talking out of my *ss without any MPIC specifics here
> (and especially not why the readback there actually is needed -
> if that doesn't happen to be the case for PCI Posting reasons or some such),
> but it's just intended as food for thought :)
>
> *) Real Silicon (rather than RL - Real Life)
>
> HTH,
>
> Andreas Mohr
> --
> 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/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-07 14:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-05 14:14 [RFC] PPC: MPIC: necessary readback after EOI? Purcareata Bogdan
2015-01-05 14:14 ` Purcareata Bogdan
2015-01-05 17:46 ` Andreas Mohr
2015-01-05 17:46 ` Andreas Mohr
2015-01-05 18:10 ` Scott Wood
2015-01-05 18:10 ` Scott Wood
2015-01-05 18:43 ` Andreas Mohr
2015-01-05 18:43 ` Andreas Mohr
2015-01-07 2:56 ` Scott Wood
2015-01-07 2:56 ` Scott Wood
2015-01-07 14:44 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2015-01-07 14:44 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2015-01-07 17:04 ` Scott Wood
2015-01-07 17:04 ` Scott Wood
2015-01-08 19:17 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2015-01-08 19:17 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2015-01-07 14:43 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2015-01-07 14:43 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2015-01-07 14:40 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2015-01-08 0:49 ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-01-08 0:49 ` Segher Boessenkool
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=1420641795.5830.31.camel@kernel.crashing.org \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=andi@lisas.de \
--cc=b43198@freescale.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.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.