[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402052123560.24986@ionos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 21:27:51 +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 v5 1/3] clocksource: timer-keystone: introduce clocksource
driver for Keystone
On Wed, 5 Feb 2014, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
> + /* here we have to be sure the timer has been disabled */
Sigh. This is not a proper explanation for a barrier, really. You want
to explain what it serializes against what. i.e. you want to explain
why you are using the relaxed functions and avoid a separate non
relaxed variant in favour of an explicit barrier.
> + __iowmb();
The proper thing is to have an inline function key_stone_barrier() and
a full explanation of the issue in exactly that place instead of
handwaving comments here and there.
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