All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Frank Li <frank.li@nxp.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Zhi Li <lznuaa@gmail.com>, Shenwei Wang <shenwei.wang@nxp.com>,
	Han Xu <han.xu@nxp.com>, Nitin Garg <nitin.garg@nxp.com>,
	Jason Liu <jason.hui.liu@nxp.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: The problem about arm64: io: Relax implicit barriers in default I/O accessors
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2021 17:59:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210621165941.GB29595@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210621162641.GA29595@willie-the-truck>

On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 05:26:41PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 04:11:57PM +0000, Frank Li wrote:
> > > Oh, interesting. Maybe this is a case where OSH vs SY actually makes a
> > > difference. I'm not quite sure what it means for the coherency of normal,
> > > non-cacheable accesses (which are outer-shareable) so that probably needs a
> > > bit more thought.
> > > 
> > > Can you confirm that the issue *does* still occur if you use dmb(osh)
> > > instead of dmb(oshst), please?
> > 
> > After get ARM support https://services.arm.com/support/s/case/5003t00001RuJHw, 
> > This issue have some progress. 
> > 
> > Our system configure SYSBARDISABLE = 0x0, So ARM core barrier propagate to CCI-400
> > 
> > Our DMA and USB is located below downstream of CCI-400. So USB or DMA is located
> > in system shared domain. Only use dmb(st), CCI-400 wait for previous transaction
> > Complete. When dma(osh), the response is sent when snoop responses are received for
> > all earlier transactions. CCI-400 don't wait for previous write finish. 
> 
> Thanks for following up. I'll cook a patch to fix this...

... and in doing so, I realised I still have a question about this.

If a CPU is writing to a zero-initialised non-cacheable buffer in memory
and does something like:

	buffer[0] = 1;
	dma_wmb();	// DMB OSHST
	buffer[64] = 1;

would a non-coherent device reading this be able to see buffer[64] == 1
but buffer[0] = 0? In other words, do we need to upgrade the dmb_* barriers
as well as the I/O accessors, or are they still ordered by the bus fabric
because all of the accesses are going to the DDR?

Will

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-21 17:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <AS8PR04MB850004639EE6CE9432BBF13E880F9@AS8PR04MB8500.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
     [not found] ` <CAHrpEqRsp2_bt=p5JgS5F-2F_LCwgT+VX7mSENzpEYTQiW1tjg@mail.gmail.com>
2021-06-17  9:27   ` The problem about arm64: io: Relax implicit barriers in default I/O accessors Catalin Marinas
2021-06-17 17:25     ` Will Deacon
2021-06-17 17:41       ` Will Deacon
2021-06-17 20:11         ` [EXT] " Frank Li
2021-06-17 21:40           ` Will Deacon
2021-06-17 22:13             ` Frank Li
2021-06-18 14:56             ` Nitin Garg
2021-06-21 16:11             ` Frank Li
2021-06-21 16:26               ` Will Deacon
2021-06-21 16:59                 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2021-06-21 17:56                   ` Frank Li
2021-06-21 18:13                     ` Will Deacon
2021-06-21 21:32                       ` Frank Li
2021-06-22  9:11                         ` Will Deacon
2021-06-23 15:48                           ` Frank Li
2021-07-06 17:11                             ` Will Deacon
2021-07-15 15:53                               ` Frank Li
2021-07-22 19:14                                 ` Frank Li
2021-08-09 13:50                                   ` Will Deacon
2021-08-09 14:46                                     ` Frank Li
2021-08-09 15:26                                       ` Will Deacon
2021-08-10 18:50                                         ` Frank Li

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210621165941.GB29595@willie-the-truck \
    --to=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=frank.li@nxp.com \
    --cc=han.xu@nxp.com \
    --cc=jason.hui.liu@nxp.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=lznuaa@gmail.com \
    --cc=nitin.garg@nxp.com \
    --cc=shenwei.wang@nxp.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.