RE: [PATCH v3 18/18] infiniband: cxgb4: Eliminate duplicate barriers on weakly-ordered archs
From: Steve Wise <hidden>
Date: 2018-03-17 13:23:17
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, linux-arm-msm, linux-rdma, lkml
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
On 3/17/2018 12:03 AM, Sinan Kaya wrote:quoted
On 3/16/2018 11:40 PM, Sinan Kaya wrote:quoted
I'll change writel_relaxed() with __raw_writel() in the series like yousuggestedquoted
quoted
and also look at your other comments.I spoke too soon. Now that I realized, code needs to follow one of the following patternsfor correctnessquoted
1) wmb() writel()/writel_relaxed() or 2) wmb() __raw_wrltel() mmiowb() but definitely not wmb() __raw_wrltel() Since #1 == #2, I'll stick to my current implementation of writel_relaxed() Changing writel() to writel_relaxed() or __raw_writel() isn't enough.PowerPC needs mmiowb()quoted
for correctness. ARM's mmiowb() implementation is empty. So, there is no one size fits all solution with the current state of affairs.I think I finally got what you mean. Code seems to have wmb() writel()/writeq() wmb() this can be safely replaced with wmb() __raw_writel()/__raw_writeq() wmb() This will work on all arches. Below is the new version. Let me know if this is OK.+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/t4.h@@ -457,7 +457,7 @@ static inline void pio_copy(u64 __iomem *dst, u64*src) int count = 8; while (count) { - writeq(*src, dst); + __raw_writeq(*src, dst); src++; dst++; count--;@@ -477,15 +477,16 @@ static inline void t4_ring_sq_db(struct t4_wq *wq,u16 inc, union t4_wr *wqe) (u64 *)wqe); } else { pr_debug("DB wq->sq.pidx = %d\n", wq->sq.pidx); - writel(PIDX_T5_V(inc) | QID_V(wq->sq.bar2_qid), - wq->sq.bar2_va + SGE_UDB_KDOORBELL); + __raw_writel(PIDX_T5_V(inc) | QID_V(wq->sq.bar2_qid), + wq->sq.bar2_va + SGE_UDB_KDOORBELL); } /* Flush user doorbell area writes. */ wmb(); return; } - writel(QID_V(wq->sq.qid) | PIDX_V(inc), wq->db); + __raw_writel(QID_V(wq->sq.qid) | PIDX_V(inc), wq->db); + mmiowmb() } static inline void t4_ring_rq_db(struct t4_wq *wq, u16 inc,@@ -502,15 +503,16 @@ static inline void t4_ring_rq_db(struct t4_wq *wq,u16 inc, (void *)wqe); } else { pr_debug("DB wq->rq.pidx = %d\n", wq->rq.pidx); - writel(PIDX_T5_V(inc) | QID_V(wq->rq.bar2_qid), - wq->rq.bar2_va + SGE_UDB_KDOORBELL); + __raw_writel(PIDX_T5_V(inc) | QID_V(wq->rq.bar2_qid), + wq->rq.bar2_va + SGE_UDB_KDOORBELL); } /* Flush user doorbell area writes. */ wmb(); return; } - writel(QID_V(wq->rq.qid) | PIDX_V(inc), wq->db); + __raw_writel(QID_V(wq->rq.qid) | PIDX_V(inc), wq->db); + mmiowmb(); }
Yes, this is what chelsio recommended to me. Reviewed-by: Steve Wise <redacted>