linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael R. Zucca" <mzucca@verizon.net>
To: Li Yang-r58472 <LeoLi@freescale.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Wood Scott-B07421 <scottwood@freescale.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: RE: [PATCH] qe_ic: Do a sync when masking interrupts.
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 10:30:52 -0500 (CDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <11892067.4322551161617453238.JavaMail.root@vms069.mailsrvcs.net> (raw)

>From: Li Yang-r58472 <LeoLi@freescale.com>
>
>But an i/o read will be considerably slower than a sync, and it is in
>the critical path of interrupt.  I have tested the patch under
>relatively heavy Ethernet load, and there is no spurious interrupt.
>Maybe it is because the device is an SOC device and MMIO store completes
>faster.  I'm wondering if there is a standard test method to show if the
>faster approach is sufficient or not.

All a sync tells you is that an I/O made it out of the CPU. The problem is, there may be other places a write could get hung up. For instance, sometimes devices sit behind a bridge with a write FIFO. In such a scenario, you can't be sure a write has made it to the device until you do a read to flush the FIFO.

If you're trying to figure out the minimum thing to do (eieio, sync, read-back, etc.) you have to understand what your system is doing between the store and the bits going into the register.

It may be that a sync is enough, but you won't know until you fully understand the system's bus/bridge topolgy between the CPU and the device.

             reply	other threads:[~2006-10-23 16:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-10-23 15:30 Michael R. Zucca [this message]
2006-10-23 16:49 ` [PATCH] qe_ic: Do a sync when masking interrupts Segher Boessenkool
2006-10-23 18:27   ` Scott Wood
2006-10-23 18:46     ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-10-24  7:17     ` Li Yang-r58472
2006-10-25  3:51       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-10-25  4:47         ` Liu Dave-r63238
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-10-23 15:32 Michael R. Zucca

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=11892067.4322551161617453238.JavaMail.root@vms069.mailsrvcs.net \
    --to=mzucca@verizon.net \
    --cc=LeoLi@freescale.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mrz5149@acm.org \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=scottwood@freescale.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).