From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: "'Luck, Tony'" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
"michael.chan@broadcom.com" <michael.chan@broadcom.com>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"luto@kernel.org" <luto@kernel.org>,
"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] drivers/net/b44: Change to non-atomic bit operations
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2020 08:47:40 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <884d937e56ba4a91abad0d1e42cc2dd4@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F7F515CBB@ORSMSX115.amr.corp.intel.com>
From: Luck, Tony
> Sent: 02 January 2020 18:23
>
> > Why not just make pwol_pattern aligned and choose the right word to do
> > the operation on?
>
> We use that approach for places where the operation needs to be atomic.
>
> But this one doesn't need an atomic operation since there can be no other
> entity operating on the same bitmap in parallel.
From what I remember this code is setting up a bitmap that is transferred
to the hardware (it might be the multicast filter).
As such it shouldn't be relying on the implementation of the bitmap
functions (which operate on long[]) to generate the required byte map
required by the hardware.
The code is horrid.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-03 8:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-20 23:29 [PATCH] drivers/net/b44: Change to non-atomic bit operations Fenghua Yu
2019-12-25 0:18 ` David Miller
2019-12-25 1:10 ` Fenghua Yu
2019-12-25 2:23 ` David Miller
2020-01-02 21:27 ` [Patch v2] drivers/net/b44: Change to non-atomic bit operations on pwol_mask Luck, Tony
2020-01-05 22:22 ` David Miller
2019-12-25 20:24 ` [PATCH] drivers/net/b44: Change to non-atomic bit operations Stephen Hemminger
2020-01-02 18:22 ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-03 8:47 ` David Laight [this message]
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=884d937e56ba4a91abad0d1e42cc2dd4@AcuMS.aculab.com \
--to=david.laight@aculab.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=michael.chan@broadcom.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.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).