Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 16/45] xen: arm64: barriers and wait for interrupts/events

[Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>]

At 15:56 +0000 on 23 Jan (1358956582), Ian Campbell wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/arm64/system.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
> +/* Portions taken from Linux arch arm64 */
> +#ifndef __ASM_ARM64_SYSTEM_H
> +#define __ASM_ARM64_SYSTEM_H
> +
> +#define sev()           asm volatile("sev" : : : "memory")
> +#define wfe()           asm volatile("wfe" : : : "memory")
> +#define wfi()           asm volatile("wfi" : : : "memory")
> +
> +#define isb()           asm volatile("isb" : : : "memory")
> +#define dsb()           asm volatile("dsb sy" : : : "memory")
> +
> +#define mb()            dsb()
> +#define rmb()           asm volatile("dsb ld" : : : "memory")
> +#define wmb()           asm volatile("dsb st" : : : "memory")
> +
> +#define smp_mb()        asm volatile("dmb ish" : : : "memory")
> +#define smp_rmb()       asm volatile("dmb ishld" : : : "memory")
> +#define smp_wmb()       asm volatile("dmb ishst" : : : "memory")

Is this effectively declaring that all 'normal' RAM shall be inner
shareable?  I think if that's the case we might want to update all the
rest of the memory management to see things that way too. 

What's the intended difference between rmb() and smp_rmb(), anyway? 

Tim.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel