On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 06:27:55PM -0500, Jack Steiner wrote: > On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 04:36:32PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 02:51:30PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > > > > I think the right way to fix this is to ensure mmio write ordering in > > > > the pci_write_config_*() implementations. Like this. > > > > > > I'm happy to fix this in the PCI core and not force drivers to worry > > > about this. > > > > > > John, can you confirm that this patch fixes the issue for you? > > > > Hang on. I wasn't thinking clearly. mmiowb() only ensures the write > > has got as far as the shub. > > I think mmiowb() should work on SN hardware. mmiowb() delays until shub > reports that all previously issued PIO writes have completed. > > The processor "mf.a" guarantees "platform acceptance" which on SN means > that shub has accepted the write - not that it has actually completed (or > even forwarded anywhere by shub). That makes "mf.a" more-or-less useless > on SN. However, shub has an additional MMR register (PIO_WRITE_COUNT) that > counts actual outstanding PIOs. mmiob() delays until that count goes to > zero. > > I'll check if there is any additional reordering that can occur AFTER the > PIO_WRITE_COUNT goes to zero. If so, it would be at bus level - not in > shub or routers. As I understand it, the mmiowb on the shub waits only for the PIO write to be accepted by the destination node (shub or tio) that the I/O device is attached to, thus guaranteeing that no reordering will happen within the NL. If the PPB can reorder the write, then mmiowb is not sufficient. You'd have to do a readback from a chip register (assuming you can trust the PPB not to reorder reads and writes), or some other work around I haven't thought of. jeremy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
![]() |