On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 20:51:57 +0800, Daniel Kurtz <djku...@chromium.org> wrote:
> The POSTING_READ() calls were originally added to make sure the writes
> were flushed before any timing delays and across loops.
> However, the normal I915_READ() and I915_WRITE() macros already call
> readl() / writel(), which already have an explicit mb().
> 
> Now that the code has settled a bit, let's remove them.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Kurtz <djku...@chromium.org>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c |    5 -----
>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
> index 2865313..be2852e 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
> @@ -131,7 +131,6 @@ static void set_clock(void *data, int state_high)
>                       GPIO_CLOCK_VAL_MASK;
>  
>       I915_WRITE_NOTRACE(bus->gpio_reg, reserved | clock_bits);
> -     POSTING_READ(bus->gpio_reg);
We do need the write flush here (and set_data) as the next action is a
udelay loop which is not per-se a mb.
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Reply via email to