linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] serio: PS2 gpio bit banging driver for the serio bus

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CACRpkdZ39AOYdN_KNLJXTkimW1WaHpYvrw89J_kJo_FJThWwuw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Aug 2017 15:35:50 +0200
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Danilo Krummrich <danilokrummrich@...develop.de>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Input <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serio: PS2 gpio bit banging driver for the serio bus

On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@...linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:16:20AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> writel() should be guaranteeing that the values hit the hardware, wmb() is
>> spelled out "write memory barrier" I don't see what you're after here.
>
> Incorrect.  writel() has a barrier which ensures that data written to
> memory (eg, dma coherent memory) is visible to the hardware prior to
> the write hitting the hardware.
>
> There is no barrier to ensure that the write hits the hardware in a
> timely manner - the write can be buffered by the buses, which will
> delay it before it hits its destination.
>
> PCI particularly buffers MMIO writes, and the requirement there has
> always been that if you need the write to hit the hardware in a timely
> fashion, you must perform a read-back to force the bus to deliver the
> write (since a read is not allowed to overlap a write.)
>
> The solution is never to use barrier() - barrier() is a _compiler_
> barrier and does nothing for posted writes on hardware buses.

Thanks Russell. I tend to forget things over time even though I have
some memory of this being spelled out to me in the past :(

Yours,
Linus Walleij