public inbox for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: gregory.clement@free-electrons•com (Gregory CLEMENT)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/3] ARM: Introduce atomic MMIO modify
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2013 11:20:19 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52284CD3.7020804@free-electrons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130905090841.GA9696@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>

On 05/09/2013 11:08, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 09:59:40AM +0100, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
>> Hi all,
> 
> Hi Gregory,
> 
>> On 30/08/2013 12:03, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:20:33AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
>>>> Perhaps we should just bit the bullet and define relaxed accessors for all
>>>> architectures? It's not difficult to default them to the non-relaxed
>>>> variants if the architecture doesn't provide an optimised implementation.
>>>
>>> Yes, an asm-generic default relaxed would be good (that's what I
>>> suggested earlier in this thread and it was discussed in the past). But
>>> no-one volunteered ;).
>>>
>>
>> I would like to make the things move on about this subject. Should it
>> be possible to merge this version of the patch set? Currently the
>> only users of this new API are drivers for ARM SoCs.
> 
> In the short term then, I'd keep this restricted to ARM. Without relaxed
> accessors available across all architectures, I don't think we can make this
> usefully generic (a readX/writeX version would be horribly slow on ARM).

OK

> 
>> In the meantime, I am willing to introduce an asm-generic default
>> relaxed variant of read and write, but as Catalin had already pointed
>> in the past
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/117626
>> it may take time to get an agreement from all the other architectures.
> 
> I actually wrote those patches yesterday but, in doing so, I realised that

Great!

> the kernel doesn't have well-defined semantics for relaxed I/O accessors
> (i.e. different architectures use them to mean different things). That makes
> portability is an issue, even if the functions are defined everywhere.

It confirms that Catalin pointed in this old thread.

> 
>> That's why I propose that this patch set do not depend on the
>> introduction of a asm-generic default relaxed variant of read and
>> write. Later when it will be accepted then this new API will be moved
>> in the asm-generic part.
> 
> Indeed, we can't make this generic until we've resolved the issues I mention
> above. I'll start a new thread around that once I've put my thoughts
> together, but that needn't block this patch imo.

I will definitely have a look on this thread!

> 
> That said, I'd still suggest resending a final version of this patch, since
> there were some minor issues with this iteration.

Yes sure, I suspect that Ezequiel already fixed  all the issues and is ready
to send a new iteration.

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Will
> 


-- 
Gregory Clement, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

  reply	other threads:[~2013-09-05  9:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-23 10:24 [PATCH v3 0/3] Introduce atomic MMIO register modify Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] ARM: Introduce atomic MMIO modify Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 10:38   ` Baruch Siach
2013-08-23 11:07     ` Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 11:32       ` Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 11:48         ` Catalin Marinas
2013-08-30  9:08           ` Will Deacon
2013-08-30  9:15             ` Catalin Marinas
2013-08-30  9:20               ` Will Deacon
2013-08-30 10:03                 ` Catalin Marinas
2013-08-30 20:08                   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2013-08-30 22:18                     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-09-05  8:59                   ` Gregory CLEMENT
2013-09-05  9:08                     ` Will Deacon
2013-09-05  9:20                       ` Gregory CLEMENT [this message]
2013-09-06 16:48                       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2013-08-23 11:28   ` Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] clocksource: orion: Use atomic access for shared registers Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 10:38   ` Baruch Siach
2013-08-23 10:49     ` Ezequiel Garcia
2013-08-23 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] watchdog: " Ezequiel Garcia

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=52284CD3.7020804@free-electrons.com \
    --to=gregory.clement@free-electrons$(echo .)com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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