To: "Bryan O'Sullivan" <bos@pathscale.com>
Cc: rolandd@cisco.com, gregkh@suse.de, akpm@osdl.org, davem@davemloft.net,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, openib-general@openib.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7 of 20] ipath - misc driver support code
References: <2f16f504dd4b98c2ce7c.1141922820@localhost.localdomain>
	<adau0a7fbzf.fsf@cisco.com>
	<1141946942.10693.36.camel@serpentine.pathscale.com>
From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 15:36:34 -0800
In-Reply-To: <1141946942.10693.36.camel@serpentine.pathscale.com> (Bryan O'Sullivan's message of "Thu, 09 Mar 2006 15:29:02 -0800")
Message-ID: <adaveundwcd.fsf@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.18 (linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 696
Lines: 15

    Bryan> It's purely a performance optimisation.  Since we tune very
    Bryan> closely to each CPU, there's no point right now in
    Bryan> sort-of-tuning for a CPU that doesn't yet exist :-)

I thought that if ipath_unordered_wc() returns false then you assume
the writes through a WC mapping go in order.  If Via behaves like
Intel and reorders writes, but ipath_unordered_wc() returns false,
then won't your driver break in a subtle way?

 - 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/