On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 11:52:10AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 07/06/17 00:00, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> > +static void plic_disable(struct plic_data *data, int i, int hwirq)
> > +{
> > + struct plic_enable_context *enable = plic_enable_context(data, i);
> > +
> > + atomic_and(~(1 << (hwirq % 32)), &enable->mask[hwirq / 32]);
>
> This is still a device access, right? What does it mean to use the
> atomic primitives on that? What are you racing against? I thought the
> various context were private to an execution context...
>
> Adding Will and PeterZ to the CC list because they will probably have
> their own views on this...
atomic_* accesses to MMIO is almost certainly a bad idea. Is this atomic
because you want to allow the function to run concurrently, or is it atomic
because you want some guarantees from the endpoint's view?
Will
