On 31/08/16 12:48, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 11:44:35AM +0100, Matt Redfearn wrote:
Since R2 of the MIPS architecture, SYNC(0x10) has been an optional but
architecturally defined ordering barrier. If a CPU does not implement it,
the arch specifies that it must fall back to SYNC(0).
Define the barrier type and always use it in the pm-cps code rather than
falling back to the heavyweight sync(0) such that we can benefit from
the lighter weight sync.
Changelog does not explain what 0x10 is, nor why its sufficient for this
case.
Hi Peter,
The code previously had 0x10 as a magic number, this patch just replaces
that with a #defined name. The value is documented in the MIPS64
instruction set manual, https://imgtec.com/?do-download=4302, table 6.5.
This sync type has been standard since MIPSr2. That document also states
that "If an implementation does not use one of these non-zero values to
define a different synchronization behavior, then that non-zero value of
stype must act the same as stype zero completion barrier." As such,
stype_ordering can always be set to this sync type rather than setting
it only for certain CPUs.
Thanks,
Matt
Changelog also fails to explain why you do this.
How do you expect anybody to review this?
