[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402042113270.24986@ionos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 21:17:28 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@...com>
cc: santosh.shilimkar@...com, rob@...dley.net, linux@....linux.org.uk,
galak@...eaurora.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, pawel.moll@....com,
mark.rutland@....com, ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk,
daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, grygorii.strashko@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] clocksource: timer-keystone: introduce clocksource
driver for Keystone
On Tue, 4 Feb 2014, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
Please do not top post.
> It was so in v1. But it was decided to use explicit memory barriers,
> because we're always sure the memory barriers are there and that
> they're properly documented. Also in this case I don't need to add
> keystone readl/writel relaxed function variants and to use mixed calls of
> writel/writel_relaxed functions.
>
> See:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg294941.html
Fair enough, but we want a proper explanation for explicit barriers in
the code and not in some random discussion of patch version X on some
random mailing list.
Aside of that it should be iowmb(), but I might miss something ...
Thanks,
tglx
--
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