All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@marvell.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: use {readl|writel}_relaxed instead of readl/writel in i2c-designware-core ?
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 19:14:47 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140214191447.7b283568@xhacker> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8705989.qzo882Ldx0@wuerfel>

Dear Arnd,

On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 01:09:44 -0800
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:

> On Friday 14 February 2014 15:54:38 Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > The writel/readl is too expensive especially on Cortex A9 w/ outer L2
> > cache. This introduce i2c read/write error on Marvell Berlin SoCs when
> > there are L2 cache maintenance operations at the same time.
> > 
> > In our internal berlin bsp, we just replaced readl/writel with the relaxed
> > version. But AFAIK, the "relaxed" version doesn't exist on all
> > architectures. How to handle this issue? 
> 
> In case of i2c-designware, this is safe because that driver does not perform
> DMA. In other drivers, you may have to be more careful, to ensure that all
> MMIO is serialized with DMA operations performed by the driver.
> 
> > Any suggestions are appreciated.
> 
> I would definitely welcome a patch that adds a default  _relaxed
> implementation to include/linux/io.h, like this:
> 
> #ifndef readb_relaxed
> #define readb_relaxed(p) readb(p)
> #endif
> 
> and then adds "#define readb_relaxed(p) readb_relaxed(p)" etc. to all
> architectures that have a non-macro definition for readb.

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll try to send out one RFC patch.

Thanks,
Jisheng

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang-eYqpPyKDWXRBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>,
	"linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
	<linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: use {readl|writel}_relaxed instead of readl/writel in i2c-designware-core ?
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 19:14:47 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140214191447.7b283568@xhacker> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8705989.qzo882Ldx0@wuerfel>

Dear Arnd,

On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 01:09:44 -0800
Arnd Bergmann <arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> On Friday 14 February 2014 15:54:38 Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > The writel/readl is too expensive especially on Cortex A9 w/ outer L2
> > cache. This introduce i2c read/write error on Marvell Berlin SoCs when
> > there are L2 cache maintenance operations at the same time.
> > 
> > In our internal berlin bsp, we just replaced readl/writel with the relaxed
> > version. But AFAIK, the "relaxed" version doesn't exist on all
> > architectures. How to handle this issue? 
> 
> In case of i2c-designware, this is safe because that driver does not perform
> DMA. In other drivers, you may have to be more careful, to ensure that all
> MMIO is serialized with DMA operations performed by the driver.
> 
> > Any suggestions are appreciated.
> 
> I would definitely welcome a patch that adds a default  _relaxed
> implementation to include/linux/io.h, like this:
> 
> #ifndef readb_relaxed
> #define readb_relaxed(p) readb(p)
> #endif
> 
> and then adds "#define readb_relaxed(p) readb_relaxed(p)" etc. to all
> architectures that have a non-macro definition for readb.

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll try to send out one RFC patch.

Thanks,
Jisheng

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: jszhang@marvell.com (Jisheng Zhang)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: use {readl|writel}_relaxed instead of readl/writel in i2c-designware-core ?
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 19:14:47 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140214191447.7b283568@xhacker> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8705989.qzo882Ldx0@wuerfel>

Dear Arnd,

On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 01:09:44 -0800
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:

> On Friday 14 February 2014 15:54:38 Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > The writel/readl is too expensive especially on Cortex A9 w/ outer L2
> > cache. This introduce i2c read/write error on Marvell Berlin SoCs when
> > there are L2 cache maintenance operations at the same time.
> > 
> > In our internal berlin bsp, we just replaced readl/writel with the relaxed
> > version. But AFAIK, the "relaxed" version doesn't exist on all
> > architectures. How to handle this issue? 
> 
> In case of i2c-designware, this is safe because that driver does not perform
> DMA. In other drivers, you may have to be more careful, to ensure that all
> MMIO is serialized with DMA operations performed by the driver.
> 
> > Any suggestions are appreciated.
> 
> I would definitely welcome a patch that adds a default  _relaxed
> implementation to include/linux/io.h, like this:
> 
> #ifndef readb_relaxed
> #define readb_relaxed(p) readb(p)
> #endif
> 
> and then adds "#define readb_relaxed(p) readb_relaxed(p)" etc. to all
> architectures that have a non-macro definition for readb.

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll try to send out one RFC patch.

Thanks,
Jisheng

  reply	other threads:[~2014-02-14 11:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-02-14  7:54 use {readl|writel}_relaxed instead of readl/writel in i2c-designware-core ? Jisheng Zhang
2014-02-14  7:54 ` Jisheng Zhang
2014-02-14  7:54 ` Jisheng Zhang
2014-02-14  9:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-02-14  9:09   ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-02-14 11:14   ` Jisheng Zhang [this message]
2014-02-14 11:14     ` Jisheng Zhang
2014-02-14 11:14     ` Jisheng Zhang

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=20140214191447.7b283568@xhacker \
    --to=jszhang@marvell.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.