[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a938dcae-0f0c-e99c-7217-29e52a4b2052@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2022 09:00:50 +0700
From: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
To: Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>, arnd@...db.de,
stern@...land.harvard.edu, parri.andrea@...il.com, will@...nel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, boqun.feng@...il.com, npiggin@...il.com,
dhowells@...hat.com, j.alglave@....ac.uk, luc.maranget@...ia.fr,
paulmck@...nel.org, akiyks@...il.com, dlustig@...dia.com,
joel@...lfernandes.org, corbet@....net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] locking/memory-barriers.txt: Improve documentation for
writel() example
On 10/5/22 17:47, Parav Pandit wrote:
> @@ -1927,10 +1927,12 @@ There are some more advanced barrier functions:
> before we read the data from the descriptor, and the dma_wmb() allows
> us to guarantee the data is written to the descriptor before the device
> can see it now has ownership. The dma_mb() implies both a dma_rmb() and
> - a dma_wmb(). Note that, when using writel(), a prior wmb() is not needed
> - to guarantee that the cache coherent memory writes have completed before
> - writing to the MMIO region. The cheaper writel_relaxed() does not provide
> - this guarantee and must not be used here.
> + a dma_wmb(). Note that, when using writel(), a prior barrier is not
> + needed to guarantee that the cache coherent memory writes have completed
> + before writing to the MMIO region. The cheaper writel_relaxed() does not
> + provide this guarantee and must not be used here. Hence, writeX() is always
> + preferred which inserts needed platform specific barrier before writing to
> + the specified MMIO region.
>
Did you mean that writeX() is write() function family?
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
Powered by blists - more mailing lists