From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>, gregkh@suse.de, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Rabin Vincent <rabin@rab.in>, Alexander Holler <holler@ahsoftware.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) instead of removing the packed attribute Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 21:55:59 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20110620205559.GM26089@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw) In-Reply-To: <201106202226.37381.arnd@arndb.de> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:26:37PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > * We already need a compiler barrier in the non-_relaxed() versions of > the I/O accessors, which will force a reload of the base address > in a lot of cases, so the code is already suboptimal. Yes, we don't > have the barrier today without CONFIG_ARM_DMA_MEM_BUFFERABLE, but that > is a bug, because it lets the compiler move accesses to DMA buffers > around readl/writel. You're now being obtuse there. You don't need compiler barriers to guarantee order - that's what volatile does there. Before you start quoting stuff about volatile, look at the volatile-considered-harmful.txt document: - The above-mentioned accessor functions might use volatile on architectures where direct I/O memory access does work. Essentially, each accessor call becomes a little critical section on its own and ensures that the access happens as expected by the programmer. which is what we're doing here. And because each accessor is its own little critical section, there's no need for a compiler barrier. > > If it is the case that these structures do not require packing to get > > their desired layout, then they don't require packing, and the packed > > attribute should be dropped. > > Yes. But are you going to audit every other use of __packed in the kernel > to check if it is used on __iomem pointers? As I've said, using __packed on __iomem pointers is fraught for many reasons, and ignoring the other reasons and just concentrating on the IO accessor problem is bad news in any case. So yes, __packed needs to be solved _irrespective_ of the IO accessor issue.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) instead of removing the packed attribute Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 21:55:59 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20110620205559.GM26089@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw) In-Reply-To: <201106202226.37381.arnd@arndb.de> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:26:37PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > * We already need a compiler barrier in the non-_relaxed() versions of > the I/O accessors, which will force a reload of the base address > in a lot of cases, so the code is already suboptimal. Yes, we don't > have the barrier today without CONFIG_ARM_DMA_MEM_BUFFERABLE, but that > is a bug, because it lets the compiler move accesses to DMA buffers > around readl/writel. You're now being obtuse there. You don't need compiler barriers to guarantee order - that's what volatile does there. Before you start quoting stuff about volatile, look at the volatile-considered-harmful.txt document: - The above-mentioned accessor functions might use volatile on architectures where direct I/O memory access does work. Essentially, each accessor call becomes a little critical section on its own and ensures that the access happens as expected by the programmer. which is what we're doing here. And because each accessor is its own little critical section, there's no need for a compiler barrier. > > If it is the case that these structures do not require packing to get > > their desired layout, then they don't require packing, and the packed > > attribute should be dropped. > > Yes. But are you going to audit every other use of __packed in the kernel > to check if it is used on __iomem pointers? As I've said, using __packed on __iomem pointers is fraught for many reasons, and ignoring the other reasons and just concentrating on the IO accessor problem is bad news in any case. So yes, __packed needs to be solved _irrespective_ of the IO accessor issue.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-20 20:56 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 124+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2011-04-27 14:34 [PATCH] echi: remove structure packing from ehci_def Rabin Vincent 2011-04-27 14:34 ` Rabin Vincent 2011-04-27 15:15 ` Sergei Shtylyov 2011-04-27 15:15 ` Sergei Shtylyov 2011-04-27 15:37 ` [PATCHv2] " Rabin Vincent 2011-04-27 15:37 ` Rabin Vincent 2011-06-16 16:17 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) instead of removing the packed attribute Alexander Holler 2011-06-16 16:17 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Alexander Holler 2011-06-16 17:09 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alan Stern 2011-06-16 17:09 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-16 17:55 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-16 17:55 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-16 19:25 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alexander Holler 2011-06-16 19:25 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-16 19:46 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-16 19:46 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-16 20:10 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-16 20:10 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-16 20:20 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-16 20:20 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-19 15:02 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-19 15:02 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-19 19:00 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alan Stern 2011-06-19 19:00 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-19 20:02 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-19 20:02 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-19 20:11 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-19 20:11 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-19 21:39 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-19 21:39 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-19 21:27 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-19 21:27 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 15:03 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alan Stern 2011-06-20 15:03 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-20 16:16 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 16:16 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 16:48 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alan Stern 2011-06-20 16:48 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-20 16:58 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 16:58 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 19:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2011-06-20 19:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2011-06-20 19:20 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 19:20 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 19:29 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 19:29 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 17:10 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 17:10 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 17:35 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alan Stern 2011-06-20 17:35 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-20 18:48 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2011-06-20 18:48 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2011-06-20 20:26 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 20:26 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 20:50 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 20:50 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 20:55 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message] 2011-06-20 20:55 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Russell King - ARM Linux 2011-06-20 21:23 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 21:23 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 22:23 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 22:23 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-21 11:25 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-21 11:25 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-25 1:25 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-25 8:09 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-28 18:51 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-29 10:56 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 19:14 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 19:14 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 19:32 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2011-06-20 19:32 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2011-06-20 20:14 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 20:14 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 20:42 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alan Stern 2011-06-20 20:42 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-20 22:36 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 22:36 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-21 15:06 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alan Stern 2011-06-21 15:06 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-20 17:39 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-20 17:39 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-20 18:39 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-20 18:39 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-20 18:46 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-20 18:46 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-20 18:57 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-20 18:57 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-20 19:56 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 19:56 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 21:04 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alan Stern 2011-06-20 21:04 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-20 22:31 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 22:31 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-21 14:58 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alan Stern 2011-06-21 14:58 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-21 20:41 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-21 20:41 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-22 6:23 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alexander Holler 2011-06-22 6:23 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-20 20:09 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 20:09 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 21:05 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alan Stern 2011-06-20 21:05 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-20 20:07 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 20:07 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 20:28 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 20:28 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 20:39 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 20:39 ` Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 21:03 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-20 21:03 ` Nicolas Pitre 2011-06-23 9:47 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-23 9:47 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-23 14:25 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-23 14:25 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-24 11:40 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-24 11:40 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-20 16:26 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-20 16:26 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed, aligned(4) " Arnd Bergmann 2011-06-16 20:30 ` [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) " Alan Stern 2011-06-16 20:30 ` Alan Stern 2011-06-16 18:16 ` Alexander Holler 2011-06-16 18:16 ` Alexander Holler
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=20110620205559.GM26089@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \ --to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \ --cc=arnd@arndb.de \ --cc=gregkh@suse.de \ --cc=holler@ahsoftware.de \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=nico@fluxnic.net \ --cc=rabin@rab.in \ --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \ /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: linkBe 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.