On Wednesday 04 June 2008 07:44, Trent Piepho wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > I don't understand why you keep talking about DMA. Are you talking
> > about ordering between readX() and DMA? PCI proides those guarantees.
>
> I guess you haven't been reading the whole thread. The reason it started
> was because gcc can re-order powerpc (and everyone else's too) IO accesses
> vs accesses to cachable memory (but not spin-locks), which ends up only
> being a problem with coherent DMA.
I don't think it is only a problem with coherent DMA.
CPU0 CPU1
mutex_lock(mutex);
writel(something, DATA_REG);
writel(GO, CTRL_REG);
started = 1;
mutex_unlock(mutex);
mutex_lock(mutex);
if (started)
/* oops, this can reach device before GO */
writel(STOP, CTRL_REG);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
