From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sinan Kaya Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] MIPS: io: add a barrier after register read in readX() Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 18:38:39 -0400 Message-ID: <33c9c074-e0a5-7552-9993-269cd85101aa@codeaurora.org> References: <1522760109-16497-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <1522760109-16497-2-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <20180412215149.GA27802@saruman> <20180412215855.GB27802@saruman> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180412215855.GB27802@saruman> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: James Hogan Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, arnd@arndb.de, timur@codeaurora.org, sulrich@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Ralf Baechle , Paul Burton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On 4/12/2018 5:58 PM, James Hogan wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:51:49PM +0100, James Hogan wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 08:55:04AM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote: >>> While a barrier is present in writeX() function before the register write, >>> a similar barrier is missing in the readX() function after the register >>> read. This could allow memory accesses following readX() to observe >>> stale data. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya >>> Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann >> >> Both patches look like obvious improvements to me, so I'm happy to apply >> to my fixes branch. > > Though having said that, a comment to go with the rmb() (as suggested by > checkpatch) to detail the situation we're concerned about would be nice > to have. I can send a new version. No worries. Functional correctness is more important at this moment. I can accommodate any nice to haves. > > Cheers > James > -- Sinan Kaya Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.