Minki/linux
1
0
Fork 1
mirror of https://github.com/torvalds/linux.git synced 2024-11-21 19:41:42 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

docs/memory-barriers.txt: Rewrite "KERNEL I/O BARRIER EFFECTS" section

Browse Source 
The "KERNEL I/O BARRIER EFFECTS" section of memory-barriers.txt is vague,
x86-centric, out-of-date, incomplete and demonstrably incorrect in places.
This is largely because I/O ordering is a horrible can of worms, but also
because the document has stagnated as our understanding has evolved.

Attempt to address some of that, by rewriting the section based on
recent(-ish) discussions with Arnd, BenH and others. Maybe one day we'll
find a way to formalise this stuff, but for now let's at least try to
make the English easier to understand.

Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>
Cc: Daniel Lustig <dlustig@nvidia.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
This commit is contained in:
Will Deacon 2019-02-11 15:24:56 +00:00
parent 79a3aaa7b8
commit 4614bbdee3
1 changed files with 74 additions and 49 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

123
Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
View File

@ -2599,72 +2599,97 @@ likely, then interrupt-disabling locks should be used to guarantee ordering.
KERNEL I/O BARRIER EFFECTS
==========================
When accessing I/O memory, drivers should use the appropriate accessor
functions:
(*) inX(), outX():
These are intended to talk to I/O space rather than memory space, but
that's primarily a CPU-specific concept. The i386 and x86_64 processors
do indeed have special I/O space access cycles and instructions, but many
CPUs don't have such a concept.
The PCI bus, amongst others, defines an I/O space concept which - on such
CPUs as i386 and x86_64 - readily maps to the CPU's concept of I/O
space. However, it may also be mapped as a virtual I/O space in the CPU's
memory map, particularly on those CPUs that don't support alternate I/O
spaces.
Accesses to this space may be fully synchronous (as on i386), but
intermediary bridges (such as the PCI host bridge) may not fully honour
that.
They are guaranteed to be fully ordered with respect to each other.
They are not guaranteed to be fully ordered with respect to other types of
memory and I/O operation.
Interfacing with peripherals via I/O accesses is deeply architecture and device
specific. Therefore, drivers which are inherently non-portable may rely on
specific behaviours of their target systems in order to achieve synchronization
in the most lightweight manner possible. For drivers intending to be portable
between multiple architectures and bus implementations, the kernel offers a
series of accessor functions that provide various degrees of ordering
guarantees:
(*) readX(), writeX():
Whether these are guaranteed to be fully ordered and uncombined with
respect to each other on the issuing CPU depends on the characteristics
defined for the memory window through which they're accessing. On later
i386 architecture machines, for example, this is controlled by way of the
MTRR registers.
The readX() and writeX() MMIO accessors take a pointer to the peripheral
being accessed as an __iomem * parameter. For pointers mapped with the
default I/O attributes (e.g. those returned by ioremap()), then the
ordering guarantees are as follows:
Ordinarily, these will be guaranteed to be fully ordered and uncombined,
provided they're not accessing a prefetchable device.
1. All readX() and writeX() accesses to the same peripheral are ordered
with respect to each other. For example, this ensures that MMIO register
writes by the CPU to a particular device will arrive in program order.
However, intermediary hardware (such as a PCI bridge) may indulge in
deferral if it so wishes; to flush a store, a load from the same location
is preferred[*], but a load from the same device or from configuration
space should suffice for PCI.
2. A writeX() by the CPU to the peripheral will first wait for the
completion of all prior CPU writes to memory. For example, this ensures
that writes by the CPU to an outbound DMA buffer allocated by
dma_alloc_coherent() will be visible to a DMA engine when the CPU writes
to its MMIO control register to trigger the transfer.
[*] NOTE! attempting to load from the same location as was written to may
cause a malfunction - consider the 16550 Rx/Tx serial registers for
example.
3. A readX() by the CPU from the peripheral will complete before any
subsequent CPU reads from memory can begin. For example, this ensures
that reads by the CPU from an incoming DMA buffer allocated by
dma_alloc_coherent() will not see stale data after reading from the DMA
engine's MMIO status register to establish that the DMA transfer has
completed.
Used with prefetchable I/O memory, an mmiowb() barrier may be required to
force stores to be ordered.
4. A readX() by the CPU from the peripheral will complete before any
subsequent delay() loop can begin execution. For example, this ensures
that two MMIO register writes by the CPU to a peripheral will arrive at
least 1us apart if the first write is immediately read back with readX()
and udelay(1) is called prior to the second writeX().
Please refer to the PCI specification for more information on interactions
between PCI transactions.
__iomem pointers obtained with non-default attributes (e.g. those returned
by ioremap_wc()) are unlikely to provide many of these guarantees.
(*) readX_relaxed(), writeX_relaxed()
(*) readX_relaxed(), writeX_relaxed():
These are similar to readX() and writeX(), but provide weaker memory
ordering guarantees. Specifically, they do not guarantee ordering with
respect to normal memory accesses (e.g. DMA buffers) nor do they guarantee
ordering with respect to LOCK or UNLOCK operations. If the latter is
required, an mmiowb() barrier can be used. Note that relaxed accesses to
the same peripheral are guaranteed to be ordered with respect to each
other.
ordering guarantees. Specifically, they do not guarantee ordering with
respect to normal memory accesses or delay() loops (i.e bullets 2-4 above)
but they are still guaranteed to be ordered with respect to other accesses
to the same peripheral when operating on __iomem pointers mapped with the
default I/O attributes.
(*) readsX(), writesX():
The readsX() and writesX() MMIO accessors are designed for accessing
register-based, memory-mapped FIFOs residing on peripherals that are not
capable of performing DMA. Consequently, they provide only the ordering
guarantees of readX_relaxed() and writeX_relaxed(), as documented above.
(*) inX(), outX():
The inX() and outX() accessors are intended to access legacy port-mapped
I/O peripherals, which may require special instructions on some
architectures (notably x86). The port number of the peripheral being
accessed is passed as an argument.
Since many CPU architectures ultimately access these peripherals via an
internal virtual memory mapping, the portable ordering guarantees provided
by inX() and outX() are the same as those provided by readX() and writeX()
respectively when accessing a mapping with the default I/O attributes.
Device drivers may expect outX() to emit a non-posted write transaction
that waits for a completion response from the I/O peripheral before
returning. This is not guaranteed by all architectures and is therefore
not part of the portable ordering semantics.
(*) insX(), outsX():
As above, the insX() and outsX() accessors provide the same ordering
guarantees as readsX() and writesX() respectively when accessing a mapping
with the default I/O attributes.
(*) ioreadX(), iowriteX()
These will perform appropriately for the type of access they're actually
doing, be it inX()/outX() or readX()/writeX().
All of these accessors assume that the underlying peripheral is little-endian,
and will therefore perform byte-swapping operations on big-endian architectures.
Composing I/O ordering barriers with SMP ordering barriers and LOCK/UNLOCK
operations is a dangerous sport which may require the use of mmiowb(). See the
subsection "Acquires vs I/O accesses" for more information.
========================================
ASSUMED MINIMUM EXECUTION ORDERING MODEL