[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220822080010.ecdphpm3i26cco5f@pengutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 10:00:10 +0200
From: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@...gutronix.de>
To: "Alice Guo (OSS)" <alice.guo@....nxp.com>
Cc: "wim@...ux-watchdog.org" <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
"linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
"shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
"s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
"festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
"linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] watchdog: imx7ulp: Add explict memory barrier for
unlock sequence
On 22-08-22, Alice Guo (OSS) wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@...gutronix.de>
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 2:24 PM
> > To: Alice Guo (OSS) <alice.guo@....nxp.com>
> > Cc: wim@...ux-watchdog.org; linux@...ck-us.net; shawnguo@...nel.org;
> > s.hauer@...gutronix.de; festevam@...il.com;
> > linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> > dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>; kernel@...gutronix.de;
> > linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] watchdog: imx7ulp: Add explict memory barrier for
> > unlock sequence
> >
> > On 22-08-16, Alice Guo (OSS) wrote:
> > > From: Jacky Bai <ping.bai@....com>
> > >
> > > Add explict memory barrier for the wdog unlock sequence.
> >
> > Did you inspected any failures? It's not enough to say what you did, you need
> > to specify the why as well.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Marco
>
> Hi,
>
> Two 16-bit writes of unlocking the Watchdog should be completed within a certain time. The first mb() is used to ensure that previous instructions are completed.
> The second mb() is used to ensure that the unlock sequence cannot be affected by subsequent instructions. The reason will be added in the commit log of v2.
Hi,
I know what memory barriers are. My question was, did you see any
issues? Since the driver is used mainline and no one reported issues.
Also just don't use the *_relaxed() versions is more common, than adding
mb() calls around *_relaxed() versions.
Regards,
Marco
>
> Best Regards,
> Alice Guo
>
> >
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Ye Li <ye.li@....com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Jacky Bai <ping.bai@....com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Alice Guo <alice.guo@....com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Ye Li <ye.li@....com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/watchdog/imx7ulp_wdt.c | 4 ++++
> > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/imx7ulp_wdt.c
> > > b/drivers/watchdog/imx7ulp_wdt.c index 014f497ea0dc..b8ac0cb04d2f
> > > 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/watchdog/imx7ulp_wdt.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/watchdog/imx7ulp_wdt.c
> > > @@ -179,9 +179,13 @@ static int imx7ulp_wdt_init(void __iomem *base,
> > unsigned int timeout)
> > > int ret;
> > >
> > > local_irq_disable();
> > > +
> > > + mb();
> > > /* unlock the wdog for reconfiguration */
> > > writel_relaxed(UNLOCK_SEQ0, base + WDOG_CNT);
> > > writel_relaxed(UNLOCK_SEQ1, base + WDOG_CNT);
> > > + mb();
> > > +
> > > ret = imx7ulp_wdt_wait(base, WDOG_CS_ULK);
> > > if (ret)
> > > goto init_out;
> > > --
> > > 2.17.1
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists