> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wood Scott-B07421
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 9:10 PM
> To: Pledge Roy-R01356 <roy.ple...@freescale.com>
> Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; net...@vger.kernel.org; linux-
> ker...@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [v2 04/11] soc/fsl: Introduce drivers for the DPAA QMan
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 04:14:50PM -0400, Roy Pledge wrote:
> > +/* Lock/unlock frame queues, subject to the "LOCKED" flag. This is
> > +about
> > + * inter-processor locking only. Note, FQLOCK() is always called
> > +either under a
> > + * local_irq_save() or from interrupt context - hence there's no need
> > +for irq
> > + * protection (and indeed, attempting to nest irq-protection doesn't
> > +work, as
> > + * the "irq en/disable" machinery isn't recursive...). */ #define
> > +FQLOCK(fq) \
> > + do { \
> > + struct qman_fq *__fq478 = (fq); \
> > + if (fq_isset(__fq478, QMAN_FQ_FLAG_LOCKED)) \
> > + spin_lock(&__fq478->fqlock); \
> > + } while (0)
> > +#define FQUNLOCK(fq) \
> > + do { \
> > + struct qman_fq *__fq478 = (fq); \
> > + if (fq_isset(__fq478, QMAN_FQ_FLAG_LOCKED)) \
> > + spin_unlock(&__fq478->fqlock); \
> > + } while (0)
> > +
>
> I don't see QMAN_FQ_FLAG_LOCKED set anywhere. What is the use case?
The idea was to allow multiple threads to manipulate the state of a frame queue
at the same time without clobbering each others changes since the operation is
a read/modify/write. I see two users of this flag in code that hasn't been
submitted upstream yet, but I'm not sure if the use is required in those two
instances either. At a glance it doesn't seem like it is needed but I would
need to follow up with the users to make sure they aren't performing FQ
management commands in multiple threads.
>
> -Scott
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
