[PATCH V2 1/5] arm: mvebu: Added support for coherency fabric in mach-mvebu
From: Gregory CLEMENT <hidden>
Date: 2012-11-15 16:49:17
Also in:
linux-devicetree
On 11/15/2012 05:21 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
Hi Gregory, On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 03:54:39PM +0000, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:quoted
On 11/15/2012 11:17 AM, Will Deacon wrote:quoted
Interesting, thanks for asking them about this. Does this mean that:Here come the answers to your new questionsGreat, thanks for the quick turn-around!quoted
quoted
1. When not running coherently (i.e. before initialising the coherency fabric), memory is treated as non-shareable, non-cacheable?It can be cacheable. The shared memory (as defined on the page table) will NOT be coherent by HW.Ok, so we really are incoherent before enabling the fabric.quoted
quoted
2. If (1), then are exclusive accesses the only way to achieve coherent memory accesses in this scenario?I quote: "I suspect there is terminology miss-use: exclusive accesses are NOT used to achieve memory coherency - they are used to achieve atomicity. To achieve memory coherency while fabric is configured to be non-coherent, SW should use maintenance operations over the L1 caches."Ok, so if I'm understanding correctly then I don't really see the usefulness of having working exclusives that are incoherent. Surely it means that you can guarantee mutual exclusion on a lock variable, but the value you actually end up reading from the lock is junk unless you litter the accessors with cache clean operations? Anyway, that's by-the-by as this is all called early enough that we shouldn't care. The thing I don't like now is that the fabric initialisation is done entirely differently on the primary CPU than the secondaries. The primary probes the device-tree (well, it's also now hard-coded for v2) and accesses the registers from a C function(armada_370_xp_set_cpu_coherent) whilst the secondaries have hardcoded addresses and access via asm (armada_xp_secondary_startup).
Now it is hardcoded in both case as you pointed it. So the last difference is setup from a C function or via asm. The differences between primary and secondary CPU when they enable the coherency, is due to the fact that we really are in a different situation. For primary CPU, as it is the only CPU online it doesn't need to enable the coherency from the beginning, so we can wait to have MMU enable and convenient feature. Whereas for the secondary CPU they need the coherency from the very beginning are by definition they won't be alone. That's why this very first instruction are written in asm and they use physical address. I don't see how to handle it in a different way. Gregory