From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: jeff@garzik.org, paulus@samba.org, torvalds@osdl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
akpm@osdl.org, segher@kernel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: Opinion on ordering of writel vs. stores to RAM
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 10:18:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200609101018.06930.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060909.030854.78720744.davem@davemloft.net>
On Saturday, September 09, 2006 3:08 am, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
> Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2006 05:55:19 -0400
>
> > As (I think) BenH mentioned in another email, the normal way Linux
> > handles these interfaces is for the primary API (readX, writeX) to
> > be strongly ordered, strongly coherent, etc. And then there is a
> > relaxed version without barriers and syncs, for the smart guys who
> > know what they're doing
>
> Indeed, I think that is the way to handle this.
Well why didn't you guys mention this when mmiowb() went in?
I agree that having a relaxed PIO ordering version of writeX makes sense
(jejb convinced me of this on irc the other day). But what to name it?
We already have readX_relaxed, but that's for PIO vs. DMA ordering, not
PIO vs. PIO. To distinguish from that case maybe writeX_weak or
writeX_nobarrier would make sense?
Jesse
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-10 17:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-09 2:03 Opinion on ordering of writel vs. stores to RAM Paul Mackerras
2006-09-09 2:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-09 3:02 ` Paul Mackerras
2006-09-09 3:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-09 7:24 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-09 9:34 ` David Miller
2006-09-09 9:55 ` Jeff Garzik
2006-09-09 10:08 ` David Miller
2006-09-10 17:18 ` Jesse Barnes [this message]
2006-09-10 19:35 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-10 21:25 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-10 22:23 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-10 22:18 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-11 13:19 ` Jes Sorensen
2006-09-10 23:35 ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-09-11 0:12 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-11 0:34 ` Jesse Barnes
2006-09-11 1:04 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-11 1:13 ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-09-11 1:35 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-11 9:02 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-11 9:23 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-11 0:25 ` Jesse Barnes
2006-09-11 0:54 ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-09-11 1:10 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-11 1:48 ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-09-11 3:53 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-11 18:12 ` Jesse Barnes
2006-09-11 1:00 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-11 18:08 ` Jesse Barnes
2006-09-11 21:32 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-10 20:01 ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-09-11 13:21 ` David Miller
2006-09-11 14:17 ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-09-12 0:32 ` David Miller
2006-09-12 0:49 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-12 16:47 ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-09-12 0:54 ` Roland Dreier
2006-09-09 11:16 ` Paul Mackerras
2006-09-09 7:23 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-09 9:38 ` David Miller
2006-09-09 15:09 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-10 17:19 ` Jesse Barnes
2006-09-10 17:35 ` Michael Buesch
2006-09-10 17:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-10 18:02 ` Michael Buesch
2006-09-09 15:08 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-09 18:34 ` Auke Kok
2006-09-09 19:10 ` Patrick McFarland
2006-09-09 15:06 ` Alan Cox
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-09-11 5:03 Michael Chan
2006-09-11 5:21 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-12 4:30 Albert Cahalan
2006-09-12 5:30 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-12 6:04 ` Albert Cahalan
2006-09-12 6:12 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-12 7:09 ` Albert Cahalan
2006-09-12 7:17 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-09-12 7:21 ` Albert Cahalan
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=200609101018.06930.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--to=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.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