[PATCH v4 1/3] clocksource: timer-keystone: introduce clocksource driver for Keystone

Ivan Khoronzhuk ivan.khoronzhuk at ti.com
Tue Feb 4 17:35:59 EST 2014

Yes. I'll send with __iowmb() instead of wmb().

On 02/05/2014 12:15 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> On Tuesday 04 February 2014 03:17 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Tue, 4 Feb 2014, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
>> Please do not top post.
>>> It was so in v1. But it was decided to use explicit memory barriers,
>>> because we're always sure the memory barriers are there and that
>>> they're properly documented. Also in this case I don't need to add
>>> keystone readl/writel relaxed function variants and to use mixed calls of
>>> writel/writel_relaxed functions.
>>> See:
>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg294941.html
>> Fair enough, but we want a proper explanation for explicit barriers in
>> the code and not in some random discussion of patch version X on some
>> random mailing list.
>> Aside of that it should be iowmb(), but I might miss something ...
> Agree. __iowmb() seems to be more appropriate.
> Regards,
> Santosh

Ivan Khoronzhuk

More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list