From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
To: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@engr.sgi.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
Linux Arch list <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
Grant Grundler <grundler@parisc-linux.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: being more anal about iospace accesses..
Date: 16 Sep 2004 16:37:23 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1095367049.2014.21.camel@mulgrave> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200409161302.49135.jbarnes@engr.sgi.com>
On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 16:02, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> Note that PCI-X and PCI Express allow a lack of synchronization via the
> relaxed ordering bit. So platforms can either set that bit in their iomap
> functions and deal with synchronization via dma_sync or not use it I guess.
Now you've confused me again. I thought the SGI implementation of this
relaxed read thing was *not* the same as the PCI-X RO bit which was why
you needed a special readX_relaxed?
My understanding is that Relaxed Ordering is that it's two bit (i.e. two
separately allowable optimisations) that allow either PIO writes to pass
DMA reads or PIO reads to pass DMA writes (or both) in the stream (I may
have this wrong, I copied Grant because he's been working on this).
I thought your readX_relaxed was only the first half of this?
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-16 20:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-08 22:57 RFC: being more anal about iospace accesses Linus Torvalds
2004-09-08 23:07 ` David S. Miller
2004-09-08 23:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-09 1:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-09 4:36 ` David S. Miller
2004-09-09 5:56 ` Richard Henderson
2004-09-09 5:04 ` viro
2004-09-09 5:05 ` David S. Miller
2004-09-09 5:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-09 6:08 ` viro
2004-09-09 8:27 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2004-09-09 6:23 ` David Woodhouse
2004-09-09 13:14 ` Alan Cox
2004-09-11 6:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-11 6:42 ` Anton Blanchard
2004-09-11 7:26 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-09-11 7:29 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2004-09-11 7:23 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-09-11 14:42 ` Alan Cox
2004-09-15 15:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-15 19:02 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2004-09-15 19:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-15 19:40 ` Matthew Wilcox
2004-09-15 20:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-15 20:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-16 12:17 ` David Woodhouse
2004-09-16 13:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-15 20:20 ` Russell King
2004-09-15 20:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-15 20:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-15 22:38 ` James Bottomley
2004-09-16 2:33 ` Matthew Wilcox
2004-09-16 4:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-16 4:57 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-09-16 4:58 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-09-16 13:41 ` Matthew Wilcox
2004-09-16 18:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-16 18:52 ` Jesse Barnes
2004-09-16 19:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-16 20:02 ` Jesse Barnes
2004-09-16 20:37 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2004-09-16 20:42 ` Jesse Barnes
2004-09-16 21:37 ` Grant Grundler
2004-09-16 20:04 ` David S. Miller
2004-09-16 20:13 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-16 20:45 ` David S. Miller
2004-09-16 20:20 ` Jesse Barnes
2004-09-17 5:17 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-09-17 15:30 ` Jesse Barnes
2004-09-16 19:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-16 19:13 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-16 19:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-16 20:07 ` Alan Cox
2004-09-17 5:44 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-09-17 5:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-09-17 15:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-16 22:30 ` Matthew Wilcox
2004-09-16 22:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-16 22:46 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-16 23:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-16 23:30 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-16 23:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-17 12:44 ` Matthew Wilcox
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=1095367049.2014.21.camel@mulgrave \
--to=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=grundler@parisc-linux.org \
--cc=jbarnes@engr.sgi.com \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
--cc=willy@debian.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox