From: "Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@nortel.com>
To: Daniel Walker <dwalker@fifo99.com>
Cc: Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>,
mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: SGU UV Add volatile to macros that access chipset registers
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 12:54:29 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AA7F9E5.4070506@nortel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1252519885.14793.135.camel@desktop>
On 09/09/2009 12:11 PM, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 13:01 -0500, Jack Steiner wrote:
>> Volatile is being added to the accessor functions that are used to
>> read/write memory-mapped I/O registers located within the UV chipset.
>> The use of volatile is hidden within the functions and is not exposed
>> to the users of the functions.
>>
>> Note that the use is limited to the accessor functions in the header
>> file. No .c files are changed or need to know about volatile.
>>
>>
>> This seems to be consistent with other uses of volatile within the kernel.
>
> The document that I cited specifically addresses memory accessors as not
> needing the volatile keyword .. So your still not addressing exactly why
> your code needs it .. Are your accessors special in some way? Is there
> some defect your seeing without the volatile keyword?
>From that document:
"There are still a few rare situations where volatile makes sense in the
kernel:
- The above-mentioned accessor functions might use volatile on
architectures where direct I/O memory access does work.
Essentially, each accessor call becomes a little critical section
on its own and ensures that the access happens as expected by the
programmer."
However, the fact that these functions are returning volatile pointers
is a bit sketchy. Normally accesses to such memory would be wrapped
entirely in a read/write function which would handle the volatility
internally to the function.
In this case there's no point in the function returning a "volatile
unsigned long *" if it's going to be cast to a volatile pointer before
being dereferenced.
Chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-09 18:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-09 15:42 [PATCH] x86: SGU UV Add volatile to macros that access chipset registers Jack Steiner
2009-09-09 16:10 ` Daniel Walker
2009-09-09 18:01 ` Jack Steiner
2009-09-09 18:11 ` Daniel Walker
2009-09-09 18:54 ` Chris Friesen [this message]
2009-09-09 19:38 ` Jack Steiner
2009-09-10 0:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-09-10 2:21 ` Jack Steiner
2009-09-10 2:22 ` [PATCH V2] x86: SGU UV Add volatile semantics " Jack Steiner
2009-09-10 3:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-09-10 3:23 ` Jack Steiner
2009-09-10 14:31 ` [PATCH V3] " Jack Steiner
2009-09-10 14:31 ` Jack Steiner
2009-09-18 12:06 ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86: SGI UV: " tip-bot for Jack Steiner
2009-09-09 19:20 ` [PATCH] x86: SGU UV Add volatile " Jack Steiner
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=4AA7F9E5.4070506@nortel.com \
--to=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=dwalker@fifo99.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=steiner@sgi.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.