All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, jgarzik@pobox.com, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gianfar: Add I/O barriers when touching buffer descriptor ownership.
Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 11:04:03 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4638B673.4090504@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <65f0b79871a670eb595cca7d78e2f4e9@kernel.crashing.org>

Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> The hardware must not see that is given ownership of a buffer until it is
>> completely written, and when the driver receives ownership of a buffer,
>> it must ensure that any other reads to the buffer reflect its final
>> state.  Thus, I/O barriers are added where required.
>>
>> Without this patch, I have observed GCC reordering the setting of
>> bdp->length and bdp->status in gfar_new_skb.
> 
> 
> The :::"memory" in the barriers you used prevent GCC
> from reordering accesses around the barriers.

Sure... it was just an example to point out that it's actually 
happening, rather than a theoretical concern.

> AFAICS you need stronger barriers though; {w,r,}mb(),
> to prevent _any_ reordering of those memory accesses,
> not just the compiler-generated ones.

My impression was that the eieio used by iobarrier would be sufficient 
for that, as we're not trying to synchronize between accesses to 
different types of memory.  Is sync really required here?

-Scott

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, jgarzik@pobox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gianfar: Add I/O barriers when touching buffer descriptor ownership.
Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 11:04:03 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4638B673.4090504@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <65f0b79871a670eb595cca7d78e2f4e9@kernel.crashing.org>

Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> The hardware must not see that is given ownership of a buffer until it is
>> completely written, and when the driver receives ownership of a buffer,
>> it must ensure that any other reads to the buffer reflect its final
>> state.  Thus, I/O barriers are added where required.
>>
>> Without this patch, I have observed GCC reordering the setting of
>> bdp->length and bdp->status in gfar_new_skb.
> 
> 
> The :::"memory" in the barriers you used prevent GCC
> from reordering accesses around the barriers.

Sure... it was just an example to point out that it's actually 
happening, rather than a theoretical concern.

> AFAICS you need stronger barriers though; {w,r,}mb(),
> to prevent _any_ reordering of those memory accesses,
> not just the compiler-generated ones.

My impression was that the eieio used by iobarrier would be sufficient 
for that, as we're not trying to synchronize between accesses to 
different types of memory.  Is sync really required here?

-Scott

  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-02 16:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-01 16:55 [PATCH] gianfar: Add I/O barriers when touching buffer descriptor ownership Scott Wood
2007-05-02  0:54 ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-05-02  0:54   ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-05-02 16:04   ` Scott Wood [this message]
2007-05-02 16:04     ` Scott Wood
2007-05-02 18:05     ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-05-02 18:05       ` Segher Boessenkool
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-05-16 20:06 Scott Wood
2007-05-18  0:45 ` Jeff Garzik

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=4638B673.4090504@freescale.com \
    --to=scottwood@freescale.com \
    --cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=segher@kernel.crashing.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.