Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Opinion on ordering of writel vs. stores to RAM | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | Sat, 09 Sep 2006 17:24:41 +1000 |
| |
> I suspect the best thing at this point is to move the sync in writeX() > before the store, as you suggest, and add an "eieio" before the load > in readX(). That does mean that we are then relying on driver writers > putting in the mmiowb() between a writeX() and a spin_unlock, but at > least that is documented.
Well, why keep the sync in writel then ? Isn't it agreed that the driver should use an explicit barrier ? Or did I misunderstand Linus ?
Ben.
- 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/
| |