From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40D92DDF87 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2008 08:10:53 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: From: Kumar Gala To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt In-Reply-To: <1229374984.26324.125.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2) Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/16] powerpc/mm: Add SMP support to no-hash TLB handling v3 Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 15:10:48 -0600 References: <20081215054554.E883EDDF9D@ozlabs.org> <1229373978.26324.120.camel@pasglop> <1229374984.26324.125.camel@pasglop> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Dec 15, 2008, at 3:03 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > >>> The whole thing. Not totally clear, you have a better name ? Some >>> CPUs >>> want a lock on sync and some on ivax, I plan to lock the whole >>> sequence. >> >> MMU_FTR_TLBIVAX_OR_SYNC_NEED_LOCK ? > > Which completely blows away the nice tab'ing :-) > > MMU_FTR_LOCK_BCAST_TLB_OPS ? Hmm.. are you mixing the two different locking needs together? The is locking of ivax vs tlbwe and there is locking around multiple "msgs" on the bus. I know for us we can have any # of ivax's on the bus, but only one tlbsync. >> Its probably a good idea to have a clear definition of what each of >> these flags means in the commit message. > > No, I'd rather have that in a comment in the code. that's fine w/me. - k