From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>,
Hitoshi Mitake <h.mitake@gmail.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: arch/x86/Kconfig selects invalid HAVE_READQ, HAVE_WRITEQ vars
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:35:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090419223519.GA27706@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49EB9F59.4080904@zytor.com>
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > Look at the drivers that define their own wrappers:
> >
> > #ifndef readq
> > static inline unsigned long long readq(void __iomem *addr)
> > {
> > return readl(addr) | (((unsigned long long)readl(addr + 4)) << 32LL);
> > }
> > #endif
> >
> > ... it's the obvious 32-bit semantics for reading a 64-bit value
> > from an mmio address. We made that available on 32-bit too.
> >
> > It's being used ... and has been in use for some time. Where's
> > the problem? readl is serializing on all default-ioremap mmio
> > targets on x86 so there's no ambiguity in ordering.
>
> I think his point is that they're not atomic. [...]
Ok - i didnt really consider atomicity, because that's not really
feasible for a number of reasons anyway:
> [...] For what it's worth, atomic readq()/writeq() *are* possible
> with any x86-32 CPU which supports MMX, but it is very costly to
> do in the kernel since it involves touching the FPU state.
>
> For the vast number of users, a non-atomic primitive which is
> available for both 32- and 64-bit x86 is a win. For a small
> number of users, it'll be confusing, and for a very small minority
> it's going to be desirable to have the atomic primitive.
>
> The reason the non-atomic is generally fine is because most device
> drivers are inherently single-threaded on a per-hardware device
> basis.
Also, atomicity might not be possible to guarantee on the bus level:
say the device sits on a 32-bit PCI bus. (No matter what instruction
the CPU gets, a readq/writeq there has to be done as two 32-bit bus
accesses.)
(Also, even a genuine 64-bit device might be bridged over 32-bit
pathways so a driver cannot really assume atomicity on that level.)
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-19 22:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-19 19:45 arch/x86/Kconfig selects invalid HAVE_READQ, HAVE_WRITEQ vars Robert P. J. Day
2009-04-19 21:12 ` Roland Dreier
2009-04-19 21:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-19 22:02 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-19 22:35 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-04-20 0:56 ` Roland Dreier
2009-04-20 2:08 ` Robert Hancock
2009-04-20 0:53 ` Roland Dreier
2009-04-20 1:20 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-20 10:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-20 14:47 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-04-20 16:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-21 8:33 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-04-21 8:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-21 8:57 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-04-21 15:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-21 17:07 ` Roland Dreier
2009-04-21 17:19 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-21 17:23 ` Roland Dreier
2009-04-21 19:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-21 21:11 ` Roland Dreier
2009-04-21 21:16 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-22 0:31 ` David Miller
2009-04-28 19:05 ` [PATCH] x86: Remove readq()/writeq() on 32-bit Roland Dreier
2009-04-29 5:12 ` David Miller
2009-04-29 11:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-29 12:10 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-04-29 17:25 ` Roland Dreier
2009-04-29 19:59 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-05-13 5:32 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-05-13 20:19 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-13 22:39 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-05-13 23:39 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-14 0:49 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-05-14 7:19 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-05-15 23:44 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-05-17 7:12 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-05-17 8:06 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-05-21 11:35 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-05-21 11:49 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-05-13 20:42 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-05-13 21:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-13 21:30 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-05-13 21:31 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-05-13 21:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-13 22:06 ` Roland Dreier
2009-05-13 22:29 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-04-29 17:21 ` Roland Dreier
2009-04-22 0:27 ` arch/x86/Kconfig selects invalid HAVE_READQ, HAVE_WRITEQ vars David Miller
2009-04-22 0:25 ` David Miller
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=20090419223519.GA27706@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=h.mitake@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rdreier@cisco.com \
--cc=rpjday@crashcourse.ca \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).