From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Anup Patel <apatel@ventanamicro.com>,
James Gowans <jgowans@amazon.com>,
Koichiro Den <den@valinux.co.jp>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de,
patchwork-lst@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] genirq: use relaxed access by default for irq_reg_{readl,writel}
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 11:59:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ttmvvxon.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240129144502.1828154-1-l.stach@pengutronix.de>
On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 14:45:02 +0000,
Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> wrote:
>
> irqchip access does not require any memory ordering between other
> memory transactions and the IRQ controller peripheral access.
> As all architectures now implement the relaxed MMIO accessors we
> can switch the irq_reg_{readl,writel} helpers to use them, in
> order to avoid potentially costly barriers in the IRQ handling
> hotpath.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
> ---
> include/linux/irq.h | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/irq.h b/include/linux/irq.h
> index 90081afa10ce..fa1597db7887 100644
> --- a/include/linux/irq.h
> +++ b/include/linux/irq.h
> @@ -1218,7 +1218,7 @@ static inline void irq_reg_writel(struct irq_chip_generic *gc,
> if (gc->reg_writel)
> gc->reg_writel(val, gc->reg_base + reg_offset);
> else
> - writel(val, gc->reg_base + reg_offset);
> + writel_relaxed(val, gc->reg_base + reg_offset);
> }
>
> static inline u32 irq_reg_readl(struct irq_chip_generic *gc,
> @@ -1227,7 +1227,7 @@ static inline u32 irq_reg_readl(struct irq_chip_generic *gc,
> if (gc->reg_readl)
> return gc->reg_readl(gc->reg_base + reg_offset);
> else
> - return readl(gc->reg_base + reg_offset);
> + return readl_relaxed(gc->reg_base + reg_offset);
> }
>
If this relaxation is introduced, it really should be documented and
require a buy-in, because unsuspecting drivers may implicitly depend
on the stronger ordering.
I'm a strong advocate of the relaxed ordering, but changing this
wholesale is potentially dangerous.
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-30 11:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-29 14:45 [PATCH] genirq: use relaxed access by default for irq_reg_{readl,writel} Lucas Stach
2024-01-30 11:59 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
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=87ttmvvxon.wl-maz@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=apatel@ventanamicro.com \
--cc=den@valinux.co.jp \
--cc=jgowans@amazon.com \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=l.stach@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patchwork-lst@pengutronix.de \
--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