[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8735s530rx.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 09:14:10 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 4/8] PCI/MSI: Enforce MSI[X] entry updates to be visible
On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 22:54:48 +0100,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>
> [1 <text/plain; UTF-8 (7bit)>]
> On Friday, July 23, 2021, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 09:11:30PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > Nothing enforces the posted writes to be visible when the function
> > > returns. Flush them even if the flush might be redundant when the entry
> > is
> > > masked already as the unmask will flush as well. This is either setup or
> > a
> > > rare affinity change event so the extra flush is not the end of the
> > world.
> > >
> > > While this is more a theoretical issue especially the X86 MSI affinity
> > > stter mechanism relies on the assumption that the update has reached the
> >
> > stter?
>
>
> Setter I suppose
My bet is on 'steer', given that this is about affinity management.
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists