Messages in this thread |  | | | From | Michael Buesch <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Document Linux's memory barriers [try #4] | | Date | Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:45:09 +0100 | |
On Friday 10 March 2006 00:34, you wrote:
> David Howells writes:
>
> > +On some systems, I/O writes are not strongly ordered across all CPUs, and so
> > +locking should be used, and mmiowb() should be issued prior to unlocking the
> > +critical section.
>
> I think we should say more strongly that mmiowb() is required where
> MMIO accesses are done under a spinlock, and that if your driver is
> missing them then that is a bug. I don't think it makes sense to say
> that mmiowb is required "on some systems".
So what about:
#define spin_lock_mmio(lock) spin_lock(lock)
#define spin_unlock_mmio(lock) do { spin_unlock(lock); mmiowb(); } while (0)
#define spin_lock_mmio_irqsave(lock, flags) spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags)
#define spin_unlock_mmio_irqrestore(lock, flags) do { spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags); mmiowb(); } while (0)
--
Greetings Michael.
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] |  |