Re: [PATCH 1/2] can: xilinx: use readl/writel instead of ioread/iowrite
From: Marc Kleine-Budde
Date: Sun Oct 25 2015 - 16:32:53 EST
On 10/22/2015 10:58 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> The two should really do the same thing: iowrite32() is just a static inline
>>> calling writel() on both ARM32 and ARM64. On which kernel version did you
>>> observe the difference? It's possible that an older version used
>>> CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP, which made this slightly more expensive.
>>> If there are barriers that you want to get rid of for performance reasons,
>>> you should use writel_relaxed(), but be careful to synchronize them correctly
>>> with regard to DMA. It should be fine in this driver, as it does not
>>> perform any DMA, but be aware that there is no big-endian version of
>>> writel_relaxed() at the moment.
>> We don't have DMA in CAN drivers, but usually a certain write triggers
>> sending. Do we need a barrier before triggering the sending?
> No, the relaxed writes are not well-defined across architectures. On
> ARM, the CPU guarantees that stores to an MMIO area are still in order
> with respect to one another, the barrier is only needed for actual DMA,
> so you are fine. I would expect the same to be true everywhere,
> otherwise a lot of other drivers would be broken too.
And the relaxed functions seem not to be available on all archs. This
driver should work on microblaze. Are __raw_writeX(), __raw_readX() an
> To be on the safe side, that last write() could remain a writel() instead
> of writel_relaxed(), and that would be guaranteed to work on all
> architectures even if they end relax the ordering between MMIO writes.
> If there is a measurable performance difference, just use writel_relaxed()
> and add a comment.
Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde |
Industrial Linux Solutions | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 |
Vertretung West/Dortmund | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | http://www.pengutronix.de |
Description: OpenPGP digital signature