On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 07:49:48 +0000,
Maulik Shah [off-list ref] wrote:

[1  <text/plain; UTF-8 (7bit)>]
Hi Shawn,

On 11/30/2021 8:01 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+	do {
+		r_val = readl(priv->base + offset);
+		udelay(5);
+	} while (r_val != val);

What? Is this waiting for a bit to clear? Why isn't this one of the
read*_poll_timeout*() function instead? Surely you can't wait forever
here.

This is taken from downstream, and it seems to double check the written
value by reading it back.  But to be honest, I'm not really this is
necessary.  I will do some testing with the read-back check dropped.

How about asking for specs instead? There are QC people on Cc, and
many more reading the list. Hopefully they can explain what this is
all about.

Maulik,

If you have some information about this, that would be great.

This can be converted to read poll_timeout(). This was introduced in
place of wmb() to make sure writes are completed.

A string of reads isn't equivalent to a dsb(st). If there is a
requirement for the write to complete, then use the required barrier.

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.