===== Documentation/DocBook/deviceiobook.tmpl 1.5 vs edited ===== --- 1.5/Documentation/DocBook/deviceiobook.tmpl 2004-10-25 13:06:49 -07:00 +++ edited/Documentation/DocBook/deviceiobook.tmpl 2004-10-29 15:38:01 -07:00 @@ -195,7 +195,12 @@ be strongly ordered coming from different CPUs. Thus it's important to properly protect parts of your driver that do memory-mapped writes with locks and use the mmiowb to make sure they - arrive in the order intended. + arrive in the order intended. Issuing a regular readX + will also ensure write ordering, but should only be used + when the driver has to be sure that the write has actually arrived + at the device (not that it's simply ordered with respect to other + writes), since a full readX is a relatively + expensive operation. @@ -203,29 +208,50 @@ releasing a spinlock that protects regions using writeb or similar functions that aren't surrounded by readb calls, which will ensure ordering and flushing. The - following example (again from qla1280.c) illustrates its use. + following pseudocode illustrates what might occur if write ordering + isn't guaranteed via mmiowb or one of the + readX functions. - sp->flags |= SRB_SENT; - ha->actthreads++; - WRT_REG_WORD(&reg->mailbox4, ha->req_ring_index); - - /* - * A Memory Mapped I/O Write Barrier is needed to ensure that this write - * of the request queue in register is ordered ahead of writes issued - * after this one by other CPUs. Access to the register is protected - * by the host_lock. Without the mmiowb, however, it is possible for - * this CPU to release the host lock, another CPU acquire the host lock, - * and write to the request queue in, and have the second write make it - * to the chip first. - */ - mmiowb(); /* posted write ordering */ +CPU A: spin_lock_irqsave(&dev_lock, flags) +CPU A: ... +CPU A: writel(newval, ring_ptr); +CPU A: spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_lock, flags) + ... +CPU B: spin_lock_irqsave(&dev_lock, flags) +CPU B: writel(newval2, ring_ptr); +CPU B: ... +CPU B: spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_lock, flags) + In the case above, newval2 could be written to ring_ptr before + newval. Fixing it is easy though: + + + +CPU A: spin_lock_irqsave(&dev_lock, flags) +CPU A: ... +CPU A: writel(newval, ring_ptr); +CPU A: mmiowb(); /* ensure no other writes beat us to the device */ +CPU A: spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_lock, flags) + ... +CPU B: spin_lock_irqsave(&dev_lock, flags) +CPU B: writel(newval2, ring_ptr); +CPU B: ... +CPU B: mmiowb(); +CPU B: spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_lock, flags) + + + + See tg3.c for a real world example of how to use mmiowb + + + + PCI ordering rules also guarantee that PIO read responses arrive - after any outstanding DMA writes on that bus, since for some devices + after any outstanding DMA writes from that bus, since for some devices the result of a readb call may signal to the driver that a DMA transaction is complete. In many cases, however, the driver may want to indicate that the next @@ -234,7 +260,11 @@ readb_relaxed for these cases, although only some platforms will honor the relaxed semantics. Using the relaxed read functions will provide significant performance benefits on - platforms that support it. + platforms that support it. The qla2xxx driver provides examples + of how to use readX_relaxed. In many cases, + a majority of the driver's readX calls can + safely be converted to readX_relaxed calls, since + only a few will indicate or depend on DMA completion.