From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754403AbeCVOwK (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:52:10 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:39876 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753117AbeCVOwH (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:52:07 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org E959D6085F Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=okaya@codeaurora.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] infiniband: cxgb4: Eliminate duplicate barriers on weakly-ordered archs To: Steve Wise , "'kbuild test robot'" Cc: kbuild-all@01.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, timur@codeaurora.org, sulrich@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, "'Steve Wise'" , "'Doug Ledford'" , "'Jason Gunthorpe'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "'Casey Leedom'" , "'Michael Werner'" References: <1521514068-8856-5-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <201803221430.P43GJl9U%fengguang.wu@intel.com> <3664b253c730dbf83f4528acaedb3a88@codeaurora.org> <3e9c006e4541acbce11743dbda553e84@codeaurora.org> <03d201d3c1eb$b71fb460$255f1d20$@opengridcomputing.com> From: Sinan Kaya Message-ID: <83484a3f-d3f7-d763-e4f8-e4fec3bb8cc2@codeaurora.org> Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 09:52:04 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <03d201d3c1eb$b71fb460$255f1d20$@opengridcomputing.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 3/22/2018 9:40 AM, Steve Wise wrote: > I think all these iw_cxgb4 changes should be reverted until we really have a > plan for multi-platform that works. I know you are looking to have support for PowerPC. Isn't this a PowerPC problem? Why penalize other architectures? Do you see anything wrong with the code itself? I started this thread with the PowerPC develoeprs on your request. "RFC on writel and writel_relaxed" They are looking into adding the relaxed API support. Support can come in later. Why block this change now? benh@kernel.crashing.org: "I've been wanting to implement the relaxed accessors for a while but was battling with this to try to also better support WC, and due to other commitments, this somewhat fell down the cracks." I have seen four different responses on this thread. Since this is an architecture change it will take a while to get the semantics right. It won't happen in the new few days. -- Sinan Kaya Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.