linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] mmc: msm: fix dma usage not to use internal APIs
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 21:42:33 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110121214233.GC23151@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0db2f2bf1ef87fbbedecece6ae2c8d33.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org>

On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 01:37:15PM -0800, Brent DeGraaf wrote:
> Russell,
> 
> Thanks for your comments. Yes, reverting is OK. The writel's are doing the
> controller write after the barrier so even though it'll be a little
> slower, it will be correct.
> 
> Regarding the "unnecessary" pre-invalidate, yeah, I misspoke.  I meant
> unnecessary POST-invalidates for non-speculative cpus.  I just checked and
> it looks like someone's already put a "FIXME" in the current 2.6.37 source
> for those.

We don't do post-invalidates either.  We may call into the processor
specific code, but the sum of what they do for pre-ARMv6 CPUs is as
follows:

arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1020e.S:ENTRY(arm1020e_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1020e.S-    mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1020e.S-ENDPROC(arm1020e_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1020.S:ENTRY(arm1020_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1020.S-     mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1020.S-ENDPROC(arm1020_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1022.S:ENTRY(arm1022_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1022.S-     mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1022.S-ENDPROC(arm1022_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1026.S:ENTRY(arm1026_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1026.S-     mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1026.S-ENDPROC(arm1026_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm920.S:ENTRY(arm920_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm920.S-      mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm920.S-ENDPROC(arm920_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm922.S:ENTRY(arm922_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm922.S-      mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm922.S-ENDPROC(arm922_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm925.S:ENTRY(arm925_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm925.S-      mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm925.S-ENDPROC(arm925_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm926.S:ENTRY(arm926_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm926.S-      mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm926.S-ENDPROC(arm926_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm940.S:ENTRY(arm940_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm940.S-      mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm940.S-ENDPROC(arm940_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm946.S:ENTRY(arm946_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm946.S-      mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-arm946.S-ENDPROC(arm946_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-feroceon.S:ENTRY(feroceon_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-feroceon.S-    mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-feroceon.S-ENDPROC(feroceon_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-mohawk.S:ENTRY(mohawk_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-mohawk.S-      mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-mohawk.S-ENDPROC(mohawk_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-xsc3.S:ENTRY(xsc3_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-xsc3.S-        mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-xsc3.S-ENDPROC(xsc3_dma_unmap_area)
--
arch/arm/mm/proc-xscale.S:ENTRY(xscale_dma_unmap_area)
arch/arm/mm/proc-xscale.S-      mov     pc, lr
arch/arm/mm/proc-xscale.S-ENDPROC(xscale_dma_unmap_area)

So we don't do anything for non-speculative prefetching CPUs on unmap.

  reply	other threads:[~2011-01-21 21:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-01-18 23:03 [PATCH] mmc: msm: fix dma usage not to use internal APIs Daniel Walker
2011-01-18 23:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-20 11:20 ` Daniel Walker
2011-01-20 13:02   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-20 13:12     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-20 15:08       ` Daniel Walker
2011-01-21 16:13         ` Brent DeGraaf
2011-01-21 16:57           ` Brent DeGraaf
2011-01-21 18:13             ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-21 19:28           ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-21 20:45             ` Daniel Walker
2011-01-21 21:17             ` David Brown
2011-01-21 21:37               ` Brent DeGraaf
2011-01-21 21:42                 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-01-18 22:25 Daniel Walker
2011-01-18 22:41 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-18 22:48   ` Daniel Walker

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=20110121214233.GC23151@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
    --to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).