From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86_64: Define 128-bit memory-mapped I/O operations
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 09:49:03 -0700
Message-ID: <50350D7F.30607@zytor.com>
References: <1345598601.2659.76.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com>    <503437D4.8090706@zytor.com>    <1345601051.2659.93.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com>    <20120821.193446.1534561579811962053.davem@davemloft.net>    <503450E2.2040504@zytor.com>    <CA+55aFy=ohFoZ1yZGdj1DCcNXU9gsndgH9Qod4q8+s=sbGKUzQ@mail.gmail.com>    <1345642009.15245.0.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>    <CA+55aFzxhxjOeFSUUJ6XQGUmnaZf7QPSz611zmj2VziEDUB_sA@mail.gmail.com>    <1345645499.15245.8.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>    <20120822143054.GD9803@kvack.org>   <1345647537.2709.0.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com>   <5034F725.2090802@zytor.com>   <AE90C24D6B3A694183C094C60CF0A2F6026B6FC1@saturn3.aculab.com>  <1345650689.2709.32.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com>  <50350098.6030100@zytor.com
 > <1345653844.2709.51.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
	Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, tglx@linutronix.de,
	mingo@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com, x86@kernel.org
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:44055 "EHLO mail.zytor.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752529Ab2HVQtX (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 22 Aug 2012 12:49:23 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1345653844.2709.51.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On 08/22/2012 09:44 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, you fail.  There are definitely systems in the field where
>> readq() and writeq() are implemented, because the CPU supports them,
>> where the fabric does not guarantee they are intact.
>
> Well, when the issue of 64-bit MMIO was discussed earlier this year, you
> said nothing about this.  I thought the conclusion was that any
> definitions provided by <asm/io.h> *must* be atomic and drivers can use
> <asm-generic/io-64-nonatomic-hi-lo.h> or
> <asm-generic/io-64-nonatomic-lo-hi.h> as a fallback.
>

That is true at the exit interface from the CPU core.  Beyond that 
drivers have to keep in mind the possible limitations of the 
communications fabric between the CPU and the device.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.