From: Sinan Kaya <okaya@kernel.org>
To: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: "xuwei (O)" <xuwei5@hisilicon.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com>
Subject: Re: About commit "io: change inX() to have their own IO barrier overrides"
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:57:01 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c1489f55-369d-2cff-ff36-b10fb5d3ee79@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2e80d7bc-32a0-cc40-00a9-8a383a1966c2@huawei.com>
Hi John,
On 2/28/2020 4:52 AM, John Garry wrote:
> About the commit in the $subject 87fe2d543f81, would there be any
> specific reason why the logic pio versions of these functions did not
> get the same treatment or should not? I'm talking about lib/logic_pio.c
> here - commit 031e3601869c ("lib: Add generic PIO mapping method")
> introduced this.
>
> In fact, logic pio will override these for arm64 with the vanilla
> defconfig these days.
We only looked at inX()/inY() and readX()/writeX() API because the
semantics of these API are defined in the kernel documentation.
We looked at how to generalize this so that there is a uniform
behavior across different architectures.
Is logic PIO subject to ordering issues?
How is the behavior on different architectures?
As long as the expectations are set, I see no reason why it shouldn't
but, I'll let Arnd comment on it too.
Sinan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-28 23:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-28 9:52 About commit "io: change inX() to have their own IO barrier overrides" John Garry
2020-02-28 23:57 ` Sinan Kaya [this message]
2020-03-02 12:35 ` John Garry
2020-03-02 16:44 ` Sinan Kaya
2020-03-03 13:18 ` John Garry
2020-03-03 16:40 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-03-03 17:16 ` John Garry
2020-03-06 3:44 ` Sinan Kaya
2020-03-06 7:54 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-03-06 10:39 ` John Garry
2020-03-06 15:16 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-03-06 16:18 ` John Garry
2020-03-06 16:29 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-03-06 16:43 ` John Garry
2020-03-11 16:12 ` John Garry
2020-03-06 21:15 ` Sinan Kaya
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=c1489f55-369d-2cff-ff36-b10fb5d3ee79@kernel.org \
--to=okaya@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xuwei5@hisilicon.com \
/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).