From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/17] Cross-architecture definitions of relaxed MMIO accessors Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 16:59:07 +0000 Message-ID: <20141030165907.GK32589@arm.com> References: <1411579056-16966-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com> <2811016.mhqlsl6pTS@wuerfel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from foss-mx-na.foss.arm.com ([217.140.108.86]:51070 "EHLO foss-mx-na.foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933737AbaJ3Q7Q (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2014 12:59:16 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2811016.mhqlsl6pTS@wuerfel> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "benh@kernel.crashing.org" , "chris@zankel.net" , "cmetcalf@tilera.com" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "deller@gmx.de" , "dhowells@redhat.com" , "geert@linux-m68k.org" , "heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com" , "hpa@zytor.com" , "jcmvbkbc@gmail.com" , "jesper.nilsson@axis.com" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "monstr@monstr.eu" , "paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "rdunlap@infradead.org" , "sam@ravnborg.org" , "schwidefsky@de.ibm.com" Hi Arnd, On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 02:15:10PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 24 September 2014 18:17:19 Will Deacon wrote: > > Hello everybody, > > > > This is version three of the series I've originally posted here: > > > > v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/17/269 > > v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/22/468 > > > > This is basically just a rebase on top of 3.17-rc6, minus the alpha patch > > (which was merged into mainline). > > > > I looked at reworking the non-relaxed accessors to imply mmiowb, but it > > quickly got messy as some architectures (e.g. mips) deliberately keep > > mmiowb and readX/writeX separate whilst others (e.g. powerpc) don't trust > > drivers to get mmiowb correct, so add barriers to both. Given that > > arm/arm64/x86 don't care about mmiowb, I've left that as an exercise for > > an architecture that does care. > > > > In order to get this lot merged, we probably want to merge the asm-generic > > patch (1/17) first, so Acks would be much appreciated on the architecture > > bits. > > > > As before, I've included the original cover letter below, as that describes > > what I'm trying to do in more detail. > > > > I've now applied the parts of your series that are required to have > every architecture provide all the 'relaxed' accessors to the > asm-generic tree, on top of Thierry's series. Since these didn't make it for 3.18, would you like me to repost the series, or do you already have a branch suitable for 3.19? Cheers, Will From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from foss-mx-na.foss.arm.com ([217.140.108.86]:51070 "EHLO foss-mx-na.foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933737AbaJ3Q7Q (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2014 12:59:16 -0400 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 16:59:07 +0000 From: Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/17] Cross-architecture definitions of relaxed MMIO accessors Message-ID: <20141030165907.GK32589@arm.com> References: <1411579056-16966-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com> <2811016.mhqlsl6pTS@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2811016.mhqlsl6pTS@wuerfel> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "benh@kernel.crashing.org" , "chris@zankel.net" , "cmetcalf@tilera.com" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "deller@gmx.de" , "dhowells@redhat.com" , "geert@linux-m68k.org" , "heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com" , "hpa@zytor.com" , "jcmvbkbc@gmail.com" , "jesper.nilsson@axis.com" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "monstr@monstr.eu" , "paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "rdunlap@infradead.org" , "sam@ravnborg.org" , "schwidefsky@de.ibm.com" , "starvik@axis.com" , "takata@linux-m32r.org" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "tony.luck@intel.com" , "daniel.thompson@linaro.org" , "broonie@linaro.org" , "linux@arm.linux.org.uk" , "thierry.reding@gmail.com" Message-ID: <20141030165907.sQ7I7NU5trwla5I4DlgSExZtlRv5zSmFCT1ZDWtmHTY@z> Hi Arnd, On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 02:15:10PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 24 September 2014 18:17:19 Will Deacon wrote: > > Hello everybody, > > > > This is version three of the series I've originally posted here: > > > > v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/17/269 > > v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/22/468 > > > > This is basically just a rebase on top of 3.17-rc6, minus the alpha patch > > (which was merged into mainline). > > > > I looked at reworking the non-relaxed accessors to imply mmiowb, but it > > quickly got messy as some architectures (e.g. mips) deliberately keep > > mmiowb and readX/writeX separate whilst others (e.g. powerpc) don't trust > > drivers to get mmiowb correct, so add barriers to both. Given that > > arm/arm64/x86 don't care about mmiowb, I've left that as an exercise for > > an architecture that does care. > > > > In order to get this lot merged, we probably want to merge the asm-generic > > patch (1/17) first, so Acks would be much appreciated on the architecture > > bits. > > > > As before, I've included the original cover letter below, as that describes > > what I'm trying to do in more detail. > > > > I've now applied the parts of your series that are required to have > every architecture provide all the 'relaxed' accessors to the > asm-generic tree, on top of Thierry's series. Since these didn't make it for 3.18, would you like me to repost the series, or do you already have a branch suitable for 3.19? Cheers, Will