From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>, Will Deacon <willdeacon@google.com>
Cc: kernel-team@android.com, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, npiggin@gmail.com,
paulus@samba.org, jniethe5@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
msuchanek@suse.de, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/64: Fix an out of date comment about MMIO ordering
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 08:38:29 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b1aa976cf9788ed7d2bf949b2b5e5e5b2e3f9776.camel@kernel.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200716193820.1141936-1-palmer@dabbelt.com>
On Thu, 2020-07-16 at 12:38 -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>
>
> This primitive has been renamed, but because it was spelled incorrectly in the
> first place it must have escaped the fixup patch. As far as I can tell this
> logic is still correct: smp_mb__after_spinlock() uses the default smp_mb()
> implementation, which is "sync" rather than "hwsync" but those are the same
> (though I'm not that familiar with PowerPC).
Typo ? That must be me ... :)
Looks fine. Yes, sync and hwsync are the same (by opposition to lwsync
which is lighter weight and doesn't order cache inhibited).
Cheers,
Ben.
> Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S
> index b3c9f15089b6..7b38b4daca93 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S
> @@ -357,7 +357,7 @@ _GLOBAL(_switch)
> * kernel/sched/core.c).
> *
> * Uncacheable stores in the case of involuntary preemption must
> - * be taken care of. The smp_mb__before_spin_lock() in __schedule()
> + * be taken care of. The smp_mb__after_spinlock() in __schedule()
> * is implemented as hwsync on powerpc, which orders MMIO too. So
> * long as there is an hwsync in the context switch path, it will
> * be executed on the source CPU after the task has performed
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>, Will Deacon <willdeacon@google.com>
Cc: mpe@ellerman.id.au, paulus@samba.org, npiggin@gmail.com,
msuchanek@suse.de, tglx@linutronix.de, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
jniethe5@gmail.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/64: Fix an out of date comment about MMIO ordering
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 08:38:29 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b1aa976cf9788ed7d2bf949b2b5e5e5b2e3f9776.camel@kernel.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200716193820.1141936-1-palmer@dabbelt.com>
On Thu, 2020-07-16 at 12:38 -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>
>
> This primitive has been renamed, but because it was spelled incorrectly in the
> first place it must have escaped the fixup patch. As far as I can tell this
> logic is still correct: smp_mb__after_spinlock() uses the default smp_mb()
> implementation, which is "sync" rather than "hwsync" but those are the same
> (though I'm not that familiar with PowerPC).
Typo ? That must be me ... :)
Looks fine. Yes, sync and hwsync are the same (by opposition to lwsync
which is lighter weight and doesn't order cache inhibited).
Cheers,
Ben.
> Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S
> index b3c9f15089b6..7b38b4daca93 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S
> @@ -357,7 +357,7 @@ _GLOBAL(_switch)
> * kernel/sched/core.c).
> *
> * Uncacheable stores in the case of involuntary preemption must
> - * be taken care of. The smp_mb__before_spin_lock() in __schedule()
> + * be taken care of. The smp_mb__after_spinlock() in __schedule()
> * is implemented as hwsync on powerpc, which orders MMIO too. So
> * long as there is an hwsync in the context switch path, it will
> * be executed on the source CPU after the task has performed
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-16 22:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-16 19:38 [PATCH] powerpc/64: Fix an out of date comment about MMIO ordering Palmer Dabbelt
2020-07-16 19:38 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2020-07-16 22:38 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2020-07-16 22:38 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2020-07-24 13:25 ` Michael Ellerman
2020-07-24 13:25 ` Michael Ellerman
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=b1aa976cf9788ed7d2bf949b2b5e5e5b2e3f9776.camel@kernel.crashing.org \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=jniethe5@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=msuchanek@suse.de \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=palmerdabbelt@google.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=willdeacon@google.com \
/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.