Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751711Ab0B1XU1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Feb 2010 18:20:27 -0500 Received: from cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com ([217.140.96.50]:63477 "EHLO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750994Ab0B1XU0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Feb 2010 18:20:26 -0500 Subject: Re: USB mass storage and ARM cache coherency From: Catalin Marinas To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Matthew Dharm , linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, "Mankad, Maulik Ojas" , Sergei Shtylyov , Ming Lei , Sebastian Siewior , Oliver Neukum , linux-kernel , "Shilimkar, Santosh" , Pavel Machek , Greg KH , linux-arm-kernel In-Reply-To: <20100226220351.GE23933@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1266445892.16346.306.camel@pasglop> <1266599755.32546.38.camel@e102109-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <1266979170.23523.1660.camel@pasglop> <1267202674.14703.70.camel@e102109-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <1267220980.23523.1820.camel@pasglop> <20100226220351.GE23933@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Organization: ARM Limited Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 23:20:22 +0000 Message-ID: <1267399222.4485.26.camel@e102109-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Feb 2010 23:20:24.0710 (UTC) FILETIME=[9B04C260:01CAB8CC] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1082 Lines: 24 On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 22:03 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 08:49:40AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > It will deadlock if you use normal IRQs. I don't see a good way around > > that other than using a higher-level type of IRQs. I though ARM has > > something like that (FIQs ?). Can you use those guys for IPIs ? [...] > The other problem we'd encounter using FIQs for IPIs is that some IPIs > need to take locks - and in order to make that safe, we'd either need > another class of locks which disable IRQs and FIQs together, or we'd > need to disable FIQs everywhere we disable IRQs - at which point FIQs > become utterly pointless. You could use the FIQ only for the DMA cache maintenance operations and not as a generic IPI mechanism. But the hardware needs to be modified. -- Catalin -- 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/