On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 02:08:19PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Thursday 03 March 2016 13:01:13 Marc Zyngier wrote:

quoted

quoted

+/* Routines to acknowledge, disable and enable interrupts */
+static void rps_mask_irq(struct irq_data *d)
+{
+     u32 mask = BIT(d->hwirq);
+
+     iowrite32(mask, rps_data.base + RPS_MASK);

I do question the use of iowrite32 here (and its ioread32 pendent
anywhere else), as it actually translates in a writel, which contains a
memory barrier. Do you have any case that requires the use of such a
barrier? if not, consider switching to relaxed accessors (which are the

I really ask everyone to do the opposite: we have seen several drivers
blindlessly using the relaxed accessors and actually introducing bugs
that way, so I'd rather see the readl/writel ones used by default.

I actually agree with Marc - we have far too many drivers using the
barriered IO accessors, which are really very expensive on 32-bit
ARM.

For most ARM systems, the rules are quite simple: a write which causes
DMA memory to be accessed by the device must be using the barriered
IO accessor, and a read from a DMA status register must be too.
Everything else need not be.  Barriered IO accessors are only about
access ordering.

That's independent of whether you need a read-back to ensure that the
write has hit the hardware: that's a completely different problem, and
one which is harder for people to understand and get right.  (Eg, for
interrupt registers.)

-- 
RMK's Patch system: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.