[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1162678639.28571.63.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 09:17:18 +1100
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
On Sat, 2006-11-04 at 14:06 +0000, Russell King wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 06:52:41PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > In fact, I would be very very very much in favor of, instead of the
> > above, defining a set of:
> >
> > readsb, readsw, readsl, readsq
> > writesb, writesw, writesl, writesq
>
> ARM already has these. Sounds like a good idea for everyone else to also
> implement them. 8)
Ok, powerpc will have these in 2.6.20 then :-)
I'm tempted to remove those mmio_* things from iomap.c completely. I
need to check who uses them, but in all cases, I don't see what they do
in iomap.c, it's not their place.
Versions that would transparently use MMIO or PIO would make sense. A
pure MMIO implementation doesn't, that has to be arch specific. It makes
the generic iomap suddently non-portable in some ways.
So I think we need to make sure all archs grow readsb,sw,sl etc... and
just have iomap use those for the "transparent" versions.
Ben.
-
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