On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
> On 02/05/2014 10:27 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Feb 2014, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
> > > + /* here we have to be sure the timer has been disabled */
> > Sigh. This is not a proper explanation for a barrier, really. You want
> > to explain what it serializes against what. i.e. you want to explain
> > why you are using the relaxed functions and avoid a separate non
> > relaxed variant in favour of an explicit barrier.
> >
> > > + __iowmb();
> > The proper thing is to have an inline function key_stone_barrier() and
> > a full explanation of the issue in exactly that place instead of
> > handwaving comments here and there.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > tglx
>
> I can add new inline function like:
>
> /**
> * keystone_timer_barrier: write memory barrier
> * use explicit barrier to avoid using readl/writel non relaxed function
> * variants, because in our case relaxed variants hide the true places
> * where barrier is needed.
> */
> static inline void keystone_timer_barrier(void)
> {
> __iowmb();
> }
>
> and use it where it is needed.
> Are you OK with it?
>
> And I propose to leave comments under the barriers in order to be
> able to understand why they are used.
Sounds good.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
