On Tuesday 04 February 2014 03:17 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 4 Feb 2014, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: > > Please do not top post. > >> It was so in v1. But it was decided to use explicit memory barriers, >> because we're always sure the memory barriers are there and that >> they're properly documented. Also in this case I don't need to add >> keystone readl/writel relaxed function variants and to use mixed calls of >> writel/writel_relaxed functions. >> >> See: >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg294941.html > > Fair enough, but we want a proper explanation for explicit barriers in > the code and not in some random discussion of patch version X on some > random mailing list. > > Aside of that it should be iowmb(), but I might miss something ... > Agree. __iowmb() seems to be more appropriate. Regards, Santosh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
