From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Xu Subject: Re: [PATCH kvm-unit-tests v6 11/14] pci: edu: introduce pci-edu helpers Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 21:08:02 +0800 Message-ID: <20161124130802.GC25010@pxdev.xzpeter.org> References: <1479898654-7707-1-git-send-email-peterx@redhat.com> <1479898654-7707-12-git-send-email-peterx@redhat.com> <20161124084701.452m6ex4udemaxl6@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, agordeev@redhat.com, jan.kiszka@web.de, rkrcmar@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com To: Andrew Jones Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58912 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936137AbcKXNIG (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Nov 2016 08:08:06 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161124084701.452m6ex4udemaxl6@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 09:47:01AM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote: [...] > > +static inline uint64_t edu_reg_readq(struct pci_edu_dev *dev, int reg) > > +{ > > + return __raw_readq(edu_reg(dev, reg)); > > +} > > + > > +static inline uint32_t edu_reg_readl(struct pci_edu_dev *dev, int reg) > > +{ > > + return __raw_readl(edu_reg(dev, reg)); > > +} > > + > > +static inline void edu_reg_writeq(struct pci_edu_dev *dev, int reg, > > + uint64_t val) > > +{ > > + __raw_writeq(val, edu_reg(dev, reg)); > > +} > > + > > +static inline void edu_reg_writel(struct pci_edu_dev *dev, int reg, > > + uint32_t val) > > +{ > > + __raw_writel(val, edu_reg(dev, reg)); > > +} > > Can you refresh my memory on why we're using __raw accessors here instead > of the __raw wrappers that include barriers and endian conversion? Hmm, > actually it doesn't look like the EDU device specifies an endianness... I see that __raw wrappers (read[bwlq]) are assuming the data is little endian, while edu device is configured as native endianess (DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN). So looks like using __raw accessors should be the correct way? But, yes here I missed memory barriers. I have only volatile protections (which __raw_*() provides). Thanks, -- peterx