| Message ID | 20190222175525.1198-1-will.deacon@arm.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | docs/memory-barriers.txt: Rewrite "KERNEL I/O BARRIER EFFECTS" section | expand |
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 05:55:25PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > 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 x86-centric, out-of-date, incomplete and demonstrably incorrect in places.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: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com> > 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: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> > Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org> > Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Queued for further review, thank you!!! Thanx, Paul > --- > Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 115 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt > index 1c22b21ae922..158947ae78c2 100644 > --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt > +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt > @@ -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: > +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: > > - (*) inX(), outX(): > + (*) readX(), writeX(): > > - 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 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: > > - 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. > + 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. > > - 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. > + 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. > > - They are guaranteed to be fully ordered with respect to each other. > + 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. > > - They are not guaranteed to be fully ordered with respect to other types of > - memory and I/O operation. > + 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(). > > - (*) readX(), writeX(): > + __iomem pointers obtained with non-default attributes (e.g. those returned > + by ioremap_wc()) are unlikely to provide many of these guarantees. > > - 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. > + (*) readX_relaxed(), writeX_relaxed(): > > - Ordinarily, these will be guaranteed to be fully ordered and uncombined, > - provided they're not accessing a prefetchable device. > + 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 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. > > - 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. > + (*) readsX(), writesX(): > > - [*] 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. > + 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. > > - Used with prefetchable I/O memory, an mmiowb() barrier may be required to > - force stores to be ordered. > + (*) inX(), outX(): > > - Please refer to the PCI specification for more information on interactions > - between PCI transactions. > + 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. > > - (*) readX_relaxed(), writeX_relaxed() > + 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. > > - 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. > + 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 outX() 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 > -- > 2.11.0 >
diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt index 1c22b21ae922..158947ae78c2 100644 --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt @@ -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: +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: - (*) inX(), outX(): + (*) readX(), writeX(): - 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 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: - 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. + 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. - 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. + 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. - They are guaranteed to be fully ordered with respect to each other. + 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. - They are not guaranteed to be fully ordered with respect to other types of - memory and I/O operation. + 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(). - (*) readX(), writeX(): + __iomem pointers obtained with non-default attributes (e.g. those returned + by ioremap_wc()) are unlikely to provide many of these guarantees. - 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. + (*) readX_relaxed(), writeX_relaxed(): - Ordinarily, these will be guaranteed to be fully ordered and uncombined, - provided they're not accessing a prefetchable device. + 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 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. - 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. + (*) readsX(), writesX(): - [*] 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. + 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. - Used with prefetchable I/O memory, an mmiowb() barrier may be required to - force stores to be ordered. + (*) inX(), outX(): - Please refer to the PCI specification for more information on interactions - between PCI transactions. + 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. - (*) readX_relaxed(), writeX_relaxed() + 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. - 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. + 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 outX() 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
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: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com> 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: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org> Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> --- Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 115 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-) -- 2.11.0