| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 12:03:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...il.com> cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>, linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clarify pci_iomap() usage for MMIO-only devices On Tue, 18 Sep 2007, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > Alright, here is the same patch inline with s/recommended/required/ language: Well, the thing is, I'm not at all sure that I agree with this. If you use ioport_map/unmap, then you really *should* access them with the proper iomem accessors (ioread/iowrite). The fact that it may happen to work (when using the default lib/iomap.c implementation, at least) on some architectures and with the current implementation still doesn't mean that you should necessarily use readb/writeb. After all, you cannot use "inb/outb" on it, even if would happen to be an IO address. So what is this usage that wants to use the bogus accessor? Why not fix that instead of adding documentation for something that is very arguably something we want to *avoid* having people do! Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists