[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1287412383.29097.1603.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 16:33:03 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Hari Kanigeri <h-kanigeri2@...com>, Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>,
Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@...com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add OMAP hardware spinlock misc driver
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 16:28 +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > Right, so the problem is that there simply is no way to do atomic memory
> > access from these auxiliary processing units wrt the main CPU?
>
> Yes. There are a few relevant system-wide limitations, one of them is
> that simply the system interconnect does not support those fancy
> atomic operations.
Does it support full memory coherency though? Otherwise I can see memory
based message passing becoming rather interesting.
Without coherency everybody needs to be damn sure to flush the relevant
bits before unlocking and such.
--
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