linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com (Jason Gunthorpe)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/3] ARM: Introduce atomic MMIO modify
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 14:08:30 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130830200830.GB6368@obsidianresearch.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130830100342.GD62188@MacBook-Pro.local>

On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 11:03:42AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:

> > Perhaps we should just bit the bullet and define relaxed accessors for all
> > architectures? It's not difficult to default them to the non-relaxed
> > variants if the architecture doesn't provide an optimised implementation.
> 
> Yes, an asm-generic default relaxed would be good (that's what I
> suggested earlier in this thread and it was discussed in the past). But
> no-one volunteered ;).

Something I've always been confused about..

Do these _relaxed operators on ARM differ from the PCI-X definition of
relaxed ordering, and are they expected to generate a PCI TLP with
the relaxed ordering bit set?

If so, what does writel_relaxed do? RO has no effect on transactions
travelling away from the PCI host bridge, so it is useless for the
CPU to generate RO TLPs.

AFAIK, on x86 read_relaxed is expected to cause the PCI behavior.
Documentation/DocBook/deviceiobook.tmpl seems to confirm this.

It seems important to reconcile the meaning before standardizing these
things :)

Jason

  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-30 20:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-23 10:24 [PATCH v3 0/3] Introduce atomic MMIO register modify Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] ARM: Introduce atomic MMIO modify Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 10:38   ` Baruch Siach
2013-08-23 11:07     ` Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 11:32       ` Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 11:48         ` Catalin Marinas
2013-08-30  9:08           ` Will Deacon
2013-08-30  9:15             ` Catalin Marinas
2013-08-30  9:20               ` Will Deacon
2013-08-30 10:03                 ` Catalin Marinas
2013-08-30 20:08                   ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2013-08-30 22:18                     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-09-05  8:59                   ` Gregory CLEMENT
2013-09-05  9:08                     ` Will Deacon
2013-09-05  9:20                       ` Gregory CLEMENT
2013-09-06 16:48                       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2013-08-23 11:28   ` Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] clocksource: orion: Use atomic access for shared registers Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 10:38   ` Baruch Siach
2013-08-23 10:49     ` Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] watchdog: " Ezequiel Garcia

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=20130830200830.GB6368@obsidianresearch.com \
    --to=jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com \
    --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).