From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sinan Kaya Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/7] netdev: intel: Eliminate duplicate barriers on weakly-ordered archs Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 10:48:11 -0400 Message-ID: <6fe4e3a4-219f-68d7-25f1-72ab86aae42e@codeaurora.org> References: <1521831180-25014-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <1521849496.15055.16.camel@intel.com> <862cdbeafb9cfd272a426b010943ffc5@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alexander Duyck Cc: Lino Sanfilippo , Jeff Kirsher , intel-wired-lan , Netdev , Timur Tabi , sulrich@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On 3/27/2018 10:38 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote: >> We are being told that if you use writel(), then you don't need a wmb() on >> all architectures. > I'm not sure who told you that but that is incorrect, at least for > x86. If you attempt to use writel() without the wmb() we will have to > NAK the patches. We will accept the wmb() with writel_releaxed() since > that solves things for ARM. > I added netdev and you to the RFC on writel and writel_relaxed list. Feel free to raise your concerns. -- Sinan Kaya Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: okaya@codeaurora.org (Sinan Kaya) Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 10:48:11 -0400 Subject: [PATCH v7 0/7] netdev: intel: Eliminate duplicate barriers on weakly-ordered archs In-Reply-To: References: <1521831180-25014-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <1521849496.15055.16.camel@intel.com> <862cdbeafb9cfd272a426b010943ffc5@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: <6fe4e3a4-219f-68d7-25f1-72ab86aae42e@codeaurora.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 3/27/2018 10:38 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote: >> We are being told that if you use writel(), then you don't need a wmb() on >> all architectures. > I'm not sure who told you that but that is incorrect, at least for > x86. If you attempt to use writel() without the wmb() we will have to > NAK the patches. We will accept the wmb() with writel_releaxed() since > that solves things for ARM. > I added netdev and you to the RFC on writel and writel_relaxed list. Feel free to raise your concerns. -- Sinan Kaya Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sinan Kaya Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 10:48:11 -0400 Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v7 0/7] netdev: intel: Eliminate duplicate barriers on weakly-ordered archs In-Reply-To: References: <1521831180-25014-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <1521849496.15055.16.camel@intel.com> <862cdbeafb9cfd272a426b010943ffc5@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: <6fe4e3a4-219f-68d7-25f1-72ab86aae42e@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org List-ID: On 3/27/2018 10:38 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote: >> We are being told that if you use writel(), then you don't need a wmb() on >> all architectures. > I'm not sure who told you that but that is incorrect, at least for > x86. If you attempt to use writel() without the wmb() we will have to > NAK the patches. We will accept the wmb() with writel_releaxed() since > that solves things for ARM. > I added netdev and you to the RFC on writel and writel_relaxed list. Feel free to raise your concerns. -- Sinan Kaya Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.