[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1157995595.23085.194.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 18:26:35 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] MMIO accessors & barriers documentation
Ar Llu, 2006-09-11 am 19:59 +1000, ysgrifennodd Benjamin Herrenschmidt:
> Ok, so we would define ordering on the first and last accesses (being
> the first and last in ascending addresses order) and leave it free to
> the implementation to do what it wants in between. Is that ok ?
Not sure you can go that far. I'd stick to "_fromio/_toio" transfer
blocks of data efficiently between host and bus addresses. The
guarantees are the same as readl/writel respectively with respect to the
start and end of the transfer.
[How do you define start and end addresses with memcpy_fromio(foo, bar,
4) for example ]
-
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