[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F55EA6D.3070602@antcom.de>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 11:43:57 +0100
From: Roland Stigge <stigge@...com.de>
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
CC: davem@...emloft.net, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
alexander.h.duyck@...el.com, eilong@...adcom.com,
ian.campbell@...rix.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
w.sang@...gutronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kevin.wells@....com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
arnd@...db.de, baruch@...s.co.il, joe@...ches.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] lpc32xx: Added ethernet driver: smp_wmb()
On 03/05/2012 11:45 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> + /* Clear and enable interrupts */
>> + writel(0xFFFF, LPC_ENET_INTCLEAR(pldat->net_base));
>> + lpc_eth_enable_int(pldat->net_base);
>> +
>> + /* Get the next TX buffer output index */
>> + pldat->num_used_tx_buffs = 0;
>> + pldat->last_tx_idx =
>> + readl(LPC_ENET_TXCONSUMEINDEX(pldat->net_base));
>
> Doesn't this need to be done *before* enabling interrupts? Also, I
> think you need an smp_wmb() so that the interrupt handler is guaranteed
> to see all these writes.
Do you mean _one_ smp_wmb() directly after lpc_eth_enable_int() (which
I'm moving behind the above code?
Note that there is no SMP in LPCs and NXP is not planning to build one
AFAIK. However, I'm fine with including smp_wmb() anyway for completeness.
Thanks in advance,
Roland
--
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