![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
> Looking at the PCI code, I see that the accesses are protected by a > spinlock. Does that guarantee in-order execution of writes to > configuration space with respect to writes to regular memory? On all > platforms? If yes, then this barrier is not needed. Hrm... there is a wmb in the unlock path, I suppose on all platforms, and iirc, ppc & ppc64 implementation of config space accesses do a full sync. On x86, they are IO ports, thus I would expect them to be fully sychronous, but I can't guarantee that semantic is respected accross all architectures. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-12-17 07:03 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||