[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0806031130130.3242@t2.domain.actdsltmp>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 11:47:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: Trent Piepho <tpiepho@...escale.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.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
Subject: Re: MMIO and gcc re-ordering issue
On Tue, 3 Jun 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008, Nick Piggin wrote:
>>
>> Linus: on x86, memory operations to wc and wc+ memory are not ordered
>> with one another, or operations to other memory types (ie. load/load
>> and store/store reordering is allowed). Also, as you know, store/load
>> reordering is explicitly allowed as well, which covers all memory
>> types. So perhaps it is not quite true to say readl/writel is strongly
>> ordered by default even on x86. You would have to put in some
>> mfence instructions in them to make it so.
So on x86, these could be re-ordered?
writel(START_OPERATION, CONTROL_REGISTER);
status = readl(STATUS_REGISTER);
> Well, you have to ask for WC/WC+ anyway, so it's immaterial. A driver that
> does that needs to be aware of it. IOW, it's a non-issue, imnsho.
You need to ask for coherent DMA memory too.
--
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