From: "Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@nortel.com>
To: Daniel Walker <dwalker@fifo99.com>
Cc: Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>,
mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: SGU UV Add volatile to macros that access chipset registers
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 12:54:29 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AA7F9E5.4070506@nortel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1252519885.14793.135.camel@desktop>
On 09/09/2009 12:11 PM, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 13:01 -0500, Jack Steiner wrote:
>> Volatile is being added to the accessor functions that are used to
>> read/write memory-mapped I/O registers located within the UV chipset.
>> The use of volatile is hidden within the functions and is not exposed
>> to the users of the functions.
>>
>> Note that the use is limited to the accessor functions in the header
>> file. No .c files are changed or need to know about volatile.
>>
>>
>> This seems to be consistent with other uses of volatile within the kernel.
>
> The document that I cited specifically addresses memory accessors as not
> needing the volatile keyword .. So your still not addressing exactly why
> your code needs it .. Are your accessors special in some way? Is there
> some defect your seeing without the volatile keyword?
>From that document:
"There are still a few rare situations where volatile makes sense in the
kernel:
- The above-mentioned accessor functions might use volatile on
architectures where direct I/O memory access does work.
Essentially, each accessor call becomes a little critical section
on its own and ensures that the access happens as expected by the
programmer."
However, the fact that these functions are returning volatile pointers
is a bit sketchy. Normally accesses to such memory would be wrapped
entirely in a read/write function which would handle the volatility
internally to the function.
In this case there's no point in the function returning a "volatile
unsigned long *" if it's going to be cast to a volatile pointer before
being dereferenced.
Chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-09 18:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-09 15:42 Jack Steiner
2009-09-09 16:10 ` Daniel Walker
2009-09-09 18:01 ` Jack Steiner
2009-09-09 18:11 ` Daniel Walker
2009-09-09 18:54 ` Chris Friesen [this message]
2009-09-09 19:38 ` Jack Steiner
2009-09-10 0:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-09-10 2:21 ` Jack Steiner
2009-09-10 2:22 ` [PATCH V2] x86: SGU UV Add volatile semantics " Jack Steiner
2009-09-10 3:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-09-10 3:23 ` Jack Steiner
2009-09-10 14:31 ` [PATCH V3] " Jack Steiner
2009-09-18 12:06 ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86: SGI UV: " tip-bot for Jack Steiner
2009-09-09 19:20 ` [PATCH] x86: SGU UV Add volatile " Jack Steiner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4AA7F9E5.4070506@nortel.com \
--to=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=dwalker@fifo99.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=steiner@sgi.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome