[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: readl/writel and memory barriers
Jesse Barnes wrote:
> To avoid the overhead of having I/O flushed on every
> memory barrier and readX/writeX operation, we've introduced
> mmiob() on ia64, which explicity orders I/O space accesses.
> Some ports have chosen to take the performance hit in every
> readX/writeX, memory barrier, and spinlock however
> (e.g. PPC64, MIPS).

I have a hunch that many drivers will break if you change the semantics of
readX/writeX from in-order to out-of-order - lots of drivers are only
developed & tested on x86, which completely hides the issue...

If you consider the performance cost of in-order readX/writeX to be
significant, then I would suggest adding another group of readX/writeX APIs
that explicitly allow out-of-order PCI access. (__raw_readX/__raw_writeX
seem to offer this already on some platforms...)


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.078 / U:9.056 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site