[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dc087ddb-020e-fe4a-832b-533bc2559e71@codeaurora.org>
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 13:28:26 -0400
From: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
To: James Bottomley <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, timur@...eaurora.org
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Sathya Prakash <sathya.prakash@...adcom.com>,
Chaitra P B <chaitra.basappa@...adcom.com>,
Suganath Prabu Subramani
<suganath-prabu.subramani@...adcom.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"open list:LSILOGIC MPT FUSION DRIVERS (FC/SAS/SPI)"
<MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@...adcom.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: mpt3sas: remove redundant wmb on arm/arm64
On 4/7/2017 1:25 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
>> The right thing was to either call __raw_writel/__raw_readl or
>> write_relaxed/read_relaxed for multi-arch compatibility.
> writeX_relaxed and thus your patch is definitely wrong. The reason is
> that we have two ordering domains: the CPU and the Bus. wmb forces
> ordering in the CPU domain but not the bus domain. writeX originally
> forced ordering in the bus domain but not the CPU domain, but since the
> raw primitives I think it now orders in both and writeX_relaxed orders
> in neither domain, so your patch would currently eliminate the bus
> ordering.
Yeah, that's why I recommended to remove the wmb() with a follow up
instead of using the relaxed with a follow up.
writel already guarantees ordering for both cpu and bus. we don't need
additional wmb()
--
Sinan Kaya
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists