linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
	Daniel Lustig <dlustig@nvidia.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>,
	Paul Burton <paul.burton@mips.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
	Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>,
	Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>,
	Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
	Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/21] docs/memory-barriers.txt: Rewrite "KERNEL I/O BARRIER EFFECTS" section
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 14:05:30 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7ff812ec9c1e2a8b734b90f7480752dfd74cb8ad.camel@kernel.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190412131727.GB29218@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com>

On Fri, 2019-04-12 at 14:17 +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> 
> +	   the same CPU thread to a particular device will arrive in program
> +	   order.
> +
> +	2. A writeX() by a CPU thread to the peripheral will first wait for the
> +	   completion of all prior writes to memory either issued by the thread
> +	   or issued while holding a spinlock that was subsequently taken by the
> +	   thread. This ensures that writes by the CPU to an outbound DMA
> +	   buffer allocated by dma_alloc_coherent() will be visible to a DMA
> +	   engine when the CPU writes to its MMIO control register to trigger
> +	   the transfer.

Not particularily trying to be annoying here but I find the above
rather hard to parse :) I know what you're getting at but I'm not sure
somebody who doesn't will understand.

One way would be to instead prefix the whole thing with a blurb along
the lines of:

	readX() and writeX() provide some ordering guarantees versus
        each other and other memory accesses that are described below. 
	Those guarantees apply to accesses performed either by the same
        logical thread of execution, or by different threads but while 
        holding the same lock (spinlock or mutex).

Then have as simpler description of each case. No ?

> +	3. A readX() by a CPU thread from the peripheral will complete before
> +	   any subsequent reads from memory by the same thread can begin. This
> +	   ensures that reads by the CPU from an incoming DMA buffer allocated
> +	   by dma_alloc_coherent() will not see stale data after reading from
> +	   the DMA engine's MMIO status register to establish that the DMA
> +	   transfer has completed.
> +
> +	4. A readX() by a CPU thread from the peripheral will complete before
> +	   any subsequent delay() loop can begin execution on the same thread.
> +	   This ensures that two MMIO register writes by the CPU to a peripheral
> +	   will arrive at least 1us apart if the first write is immediately read
> +	   back with readX() and udelay(1) is called prior to the second
> +	   writeX():
>  
>  		writel(42, DEVICE_REGISTER_0); // Arrives at the device...
>  		readl(DEVICE_REGISTER_0);
> @@ -2600,8 +2604,10 @@ guarantees:
>  	These will perform appropriately for the type of access they're actually
>  	doing, be it inX()/outX() or readX()/writeX().
>  
> -All of these accessors assume that the underlying peripheral is little-endian,
> -and will therefore perform byte-swapping operations on big-endian architectures.
> +With the exception of the string accessors (insX(), outsX(), readsX() and
> +writesX()), all of the above assume that the underlying peripheral is
> +little-endian and will therefore perform byte-swapping operations on big-endian
> +architectures.
>  
>  
>  ========================================


  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-15  4:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-05 13:59 [PATCH v2 00/21] Remove Mysterious Macro Intended to Obscure Weird Behaviours (mmiowb()) Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 01/21] docs/memory-barriers.txt: Rewrite "KERNEL I/O BARRIER EFFECTS" section Will Deacon
2019-04-10 10:58   ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-10 12:28     ` Will Deacon
2019-04-11 11:00       ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-11 22:12   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2019-04-11 22:34     ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-12  2:07       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2019-04-12 13:17         ` Will Deacon
2019-04-15  4:05           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2019-04-16  9:13             ` Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 02/21] asm-generic/mmiowb: Add generic implementation of mmiowb() tracking Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 03/21] arch: Use asm-generic header for asm/mmiowb.h Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 04/21] mmiowb: Hook up mmiowb helpers to spinlocks and generic I/O accessors Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 05/21] ARM/io: Remove useless definition of mmiowb() Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 06/21] arm64/io: " Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 07/21] x86/io: " Will Deacon
2019-04-05 14:14   ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 08/21] nds32/io: " Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 09/21] m68k/io: " Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 10/21] sh/mmiowb: Add unconditional mmiowb() to arch_spin_unlock() Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 11/21] mips/mmiowb: " Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 12/21] ia64/mmiowb: " Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 13/21] powerpc/mmiowb: Hook up mmwiob() implementation to asm-generic code Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 14/21] riscv/mmiowb: " Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 15/21] Documentation: Kill all references to mmiowb() Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 16/21] drivers: Remove useless trailing comments from mmiowb() invocations Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 17/21] drivers: Remove explicit invocations of mmiowb() Will Deacon
2019-04-05 15:50   ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-09  9:00     ` Nicholas Piggin
2019-04-09 13:46       ` Will Deacon
2019-04-10  0:25         ` Nicholas Piggin
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 18/21] scsi/qla1280: Remove stale comment about mmiowb() Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 19/21] i40iw: Redefine i40iw_mmiowb() to do nothing Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 20/21] net/ethernet/silan/sc92031: Remove stale comment about mmiowb() Will Deacon
2019-04-05 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 21/21] arch: Remove dummy mmiowb() definitions from arch code Will Deacon
2019-04-05 15:55 ` [PATCH v2 00/21] Remove Mysterious Macro Intended to Obscure Weird Behaviours (mmiowb()) Linus Torvalds
2019-04-05 16:09   ` Will Deacon
2019-04-05 16:15     ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-05 16:30       ` Will Deacon

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=7ff812ec9c1e2a8b734b90f7480752dfd74cb8ad.camel@kernel.crashing.org \
    --to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=akiyks@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=dalias@libc.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=dlustig@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=macro@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=palmer@sifive.com \
    --cc=paul.burton@mips.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).