[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080530080700.773a82cc@siona.local>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 08:07:00 +0200
From: Haavard Skinnemoen <haavard.skinnemoen@...el.com>
To: benh@...nel.crashing.org
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
scottwood@...escale.com, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tpiepho@...escale.com
Subject: Re: MMIO and gcc re-ordering issue
On Fri, 30 May 2008 11:13:23 +1000
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
> > Currently, this is the only interface I know that can do native-endian
> > accesses, so if you take it away, I'm gonna need an alternative
> > interface that doesn't do byteswapping.
>
> Are you aware that these also don't provide any ordering guarantee ?
Yes, but I am not aware of any alternative.
I think the drivers I've written have the necessary barriers (or dma
ops with implicit barriers) that they don't actually depend on any
DMA vs. MMIO ordering guarantees. I hope MMIO vs. MMIO ordering is
guaranteed though?
Haavard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists