![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Alan Cox writes: > On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 10:34:53AM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote: > > 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". > > Agreed. But if it is missing it may not be a bug. It depends what the lock > actually protects. True. What I want is a statement that if one of the purposes of the spinlock is to provide ordering of the MMIO accesses, then leaving out the mmiowb is a bug. I want it to be like the PCI DMA API in that drivers are required to use it even on platforms where it's a no-op. Paul. - 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: 2006-03-10 00:57 [W:0.080 / U:0.010 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||