To: Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>
Cc: "Bryan O'Sullivan" <bos@pathscale.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
       Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Define wc_wmb, a write barrier for PCI write combining
References: <1140841250.2587.33.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<yq08xrvhkee.fsf@jaguar.mkp.net> <adar75nlcar.fsf@cisco.com>
	<44047565.3090202@sgi.com>
From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 09:02:47 -0800
In-Reply-To: <44047565.3090202@sgi.com> (Jes Sorensen's message of "Tue, 28
 Feb 2006 17:08:05 +0100")
Message-ID: <adafym3l8lk.fsf@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.17 (Jumbo Shrimp, linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1075
Lines: 21

    Jes> Not quite correct as far as I understand it. mmiowb() is
    Jes> supposed to guarantee that writes to MMIO space have
    Jes> completed before continuing.  That of course covers the
    Jes> multi-CPU case, but it should also cover the write-combining
    Jes> case.

I don't believe this is correct.  mmiowb() does not guarantee that
writes have completed -- they may still be pending in a buffer in a
bridge somewhere.  The _only_ effect of mmiowb() is to make sure that
writes which have been ordered between CPUs using some other mechanism
(i.e. a lock) are properly ordered by the rest of the system.  This
only has an effect systems like very large ia64 systems, where (as I
understand it), writes can pass each other on the way to the PCI bus.
In fact, mmiowb() is a NOP on essentially every architecture.

 - R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/