linux-arch.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	"linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"benh@kernel.crashing.org" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	"chris@zankel.net" <chris@zankel.net>,
	"cmetcalf@tilera.com" <cmetcalf@tilera.com>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"deller@gmx.de" <deller@gmx.de>,
	"dhowells@redhat.com" <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	"geert@linux-m68k.org" <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	"heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com" <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	"jcmvbkbc@gmail.com" <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
	"jesper.nilsson@axis.com" <jesper.nilsson@axis.com>,
	"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"monstr@monstr.eu" <monstr@monstr.eu>,
	"paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"rdunlap@infradead.org" <rdunlap@infradead.>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/17] Cross-architecture definitions of relaxed MMIO accessors
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:28:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2497501.Mvb1tbCjLR@wuerfel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140926084019.GJ5182@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Friday 26 September 2014 09:40:19 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> 
> How would a 32-bit architecture know whether it should read the least
> significant 32-bit or the most significant 32-bit part of the 64-bit
> register first.  What would be right for one driver may not ben correct
> for another.  Hence, this decision should only be made by the driver
> wanting the accessor, and not having the accessor symbol defined should
> be the trigger for the driver to handle the problem themselves.

Some 32-bit architectures can trigger 64-bit bus cycles using well
defined accesses using register pairs. Meta seems to fit into this
category:

static inline u64 __raw_readq(const volatile void __iomem *addr)
{
       u64 ret;
       asm volatile("GETL %0,%t0,[%1]"
                    : "=da" (ret)
                    : "da" (addr)
                    : "memory");
       return ret;
}

Most other architectures I think cannot do this however, and would
turn the access into two separate bus cycles, which in addition to
the problem you mentioned could also result in side-effects from
doing an access at the wrong offset, so we definitely can't rely
on having these functions.

	Arnd

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	"linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"benh@kernel.crashing.org" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	"chris@zankel.net" <chris@zankel.net>,
	"cmetcalf@tilera.com" <cmetcalf@tilera.com>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"deller@gmx.de" <deller@gmx.de>,
	"dhowells@redhat.com" <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	"geert@linux-m68k.org" <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	"heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com" <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	"jcmvbkbc@gmail.com" <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
	"jesper.nilsson@axis.com" <jesper.nilsson@axis.com>,
	"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"monstr@monstr.eu" <monstr@monstr.eu>,
	"paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"rdunlap@infradead.org" <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	"sam@ravnborg.org" <sam@ravnborg.org>,
	"schwidefsky@de.ibm.com" <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	"starvik@axis.com" <starvik@axis.com>,
	"takata@linux-m32r.org" <takata@linux-m32r.org>,
	"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"tony.luck@intel.com" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	"broonie@linaro.org" <broonie@linaro.org>,
	"thierry.reding@gmail.com" <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/17] Cross-architecture definitions of relaxed MMIO accessors
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:28:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2497501.Mvb1tbCjLR@wuerfel> (raw)
Message-ID: <20140926092838.bwvr5zx2fMq98UxbY1UzwW4QUs-knlmUjkDCJ2OCqqY@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140926084019.GJ5182@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Friday 26 September 2014 09:40:19 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> 
> How would a 32-bit architecture know whether it should read the least
> significant 32-bit or the most significant 32-bit part of the 64-bit
> register first.  What would be right for one driver may not ben correct
> for another.  Hence, this decision should only be made by the driver
> wanting the accessor, and not having the accessor symbol defined should
> be the trigger for the driver to handle the problem themselves.

Some 32-bit architectures can trigger 64-bit bus cycles using well
defined accesses using register pairs. Meta seems to fit into this
category:

static inline u64 __raw_readq(const volatile void __iomem *addr)
{
       u64 ret;
       asm volatile("GETL %0,%t0,[%1]"
                    : "=da" (ret)
                    : "da" (addr)
                    : "memory");
       return ret;
}

Most other architectures I think cannot do this however, and would
turn the access into two separate bus cycles, which in addition to
the problem you mentioned could also result in side-effects from
doing an access at the wrong offset, so we definitely can't rely
on having these functions.

	Arnd

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-09-26  9:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 93+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-09-24 17:17 [PATCH v3 00/17] Cross-architecture definitions of relaxed MMIO accessors Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 01/17] asm-generic: io: implement relaxed accessor macros as conditional wrappers Will Deacon
2014-09-25 10:32   ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 10:32     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 10:38     ` Will Deacon
2014-09-25 10:38       ` Will Deacon
2014-09-25 10:43       ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 10:43         ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 11:44         ` Will Deacon
2014-09-25 11:44           ` Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 02/17] microblaze: io: remove dummy relaxed accessor macros Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 03/17] s390: io: remove dummy relaxed accessor macros for reads Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 04/17] xtensa: " Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-25 15:22   ` Max Filippov
2014-09-25 15:22     ` Max Filippov
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 05/17] frv: io: implement dummy relaxed accessor macros for writes Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 06/17] cris: " Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 07/17] ia64: " Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 08/17] m32r: " Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 09/17] m68k: " Will Deacon
2014-09-25  1:05   ` Greg Ungerer
2014-09-25  9:33     ` Will Deacon
2014-09-25  9:33       ` Will Deacon
2014-09-25  9:51       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-09-25  9:51         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-09-25 10:33         ` Will Deacon
2014-09-25 10:33           ` Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 10/17] mn10300: " Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 11/17] parisc: " Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-25 20:00   ` Helge Deller
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 12/17] powerpc: " Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 13/17] sparc: " Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 14/17] tile: " Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 15/17] x86: " Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 16/17] documentation: memory-barriers: clarify relaxed io accessor semantics Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 17/17] asm-generic: io: define relaxed accessor macros unconditionally Will Deacon
2014-09-24 17:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-25 10:42 ` [PATCH v3 00/17] Cross-architecture definitions of relaxed MMIO accessors Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 13:15 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 13:15   ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 14:55   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-25 14:55     ` Will Deacon
2014-09-25 15:07     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 15:07       ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 15:15       ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 15:15         ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 15:24         ` Daniel Thompson
2014-09-25 15:24           ` Daniel Thompson
2014-09-25 19:17           ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 19:17             ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 20:17             ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-09-25 20:17               ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-09-26  8:40             ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-09-26  8:40               ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-09-26  9:28               ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2014-09-26  9:28                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-26  8:05         ` Thierry Reding
2014-09-26  8:05           ` Thierry Reding
2014-09-26 13:39           ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-26 13:39             ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-26 13:46             ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-09-26 13:46               ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-09-26 21:36               ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-26 21:36                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-29  8:23                 ` Thierry Reding
2014-09-29  8:23                   ` Thierry Reding
2014-09-29  9:50                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-29  9:50                     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-01 15:23                     ` Thierry Reding
2014-10-01 15:23                       ` Thierry Reding
2014-10-01 18:34                       ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-01 18:34                         ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-29  9:25                 ` Will Deacon
2014-09-29  9:25                   ` Will Deacon
2014-09-29  9:48                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-29  9:48                     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-30 16:59   ` Will Deacon
2014-10-30 16:59     ` Will Deacon
2014-10-30 20:04     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-30 20:04       ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-10-31 11:09       ` Thierry Reding
2014-10-31 11:09         ` Thierry Reding

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=2497501.Mvb1tbCjLR@wuerfel \
    --to=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=chris@zankel.net \
    --cc=cmetcalf@tilera.com \
    --cc=daniel.thompson@linaro.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=deller@gmx.de \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jcmvbkbc@gmail.com \
    --cc=jesper.nilsson@axis.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=monstr@monstr.eu \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead. \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).