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 linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html