[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180329.100414.1839699928682052200.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 10:04:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: okaya@...eaurora.org
Cc: benh@...nel.crashing.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
alexander.duyck@...il.com, will.deacon@....com, arnd@...db.de,
jgg@...pe.ca, David.Laight@...lab.com, oohall@...il.com,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
alexander.h.duyck@...hat.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linus971@...il.com
Subject: Re: RFC on writel and writel_relaxed
From: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:56:01 -0400
> sparc question sent
Sparc never lets physical memory accesses pass MMIO, and vice versa.
They are always strongly ordered amongst eachother.
Therefore no explicit barrier instructions are necessary.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists