[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180323.122035.1380806748695640531.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 12:20:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: okaya@...eaurora.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, timur@...eaurora.org,
sulrich@...eaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, ariel.elior@...ium.com,
everest-linux-l2@...ium.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] bnx2x: Eliminate duplicate barriers on
weakly-ordered archs
From: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 13:10:00 -0400
> Code includes wmb() followed by writel(). writel() already has a
> barrier on some architectures like arm64.
...
> @@ -4155,7 +4155,7 @@ netdev_tx_t bnx2x_start_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
> txdata->tx_db.data.prod += nbd;
> barrier();
>
> - DOORBELL(bp, txdata->cid, txdata->tx_db.raw);
> + DOORBELL_RELAXED(bp, txdata->cid, txdata->tx_db.raw);
>
> mmiowb();
...
> @@ -2592,7 +2592,7 @@ static int bnx2x_run_loopback(struct bnx2x *bp, int loopback_mode)
>
> txdata->tx_db.data.prod += 2;
> barrier();
> - DOORBELL(bp, txdata->cid, txdata->tx_db.raw);
> + DOORBELL_RELAXED(bp, txdata->cid, txdata->tx_db.raw);
These are compiler barriers being used here, not wmb().
Look, if I can't see a clear:
wmb()
writel()
sequence in the patch hunks, I am going to keep pushing back on
these changes.
Thank you.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists