On Saturday, September 09, 2006 3:08 am, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2006 05:55:19 -0400
>
> > As (I think) BenH mentioned in another email, the normal way Linux
> > handles these interfaces is for the primary API (readX, writeX) to
> > be strongly ordered, strongly coherent, etc. And then there is a
> > relaxed version without barriers and syncs, for the smart guys who
> > know what they're doing
>
> Indeed, I think that is the way to handle this.
Well why didn't you guys mention this when mmiowb() went in?
I agree that having a relaxed PIO ordering version of writeX makes sense
(jejb convinced me of this on irc the other day). But what to name it?
We already have readX_relaxed, but that's for PIO vs. DMA ordering, not
PIO vs. PIO. To distinguish from that case maybe writeX_weak or
writeX_nobarrier would make sense?
Jesse
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
