[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1187317106.12314.6.camel@roc-desktop>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:18:26 +0800
From: Bryan Wu <bryan.wu@...log.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc: Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com>,
Sonic Zhang <sonic.adi@...il.com>,
Linux IDE <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Bryan Wu <bryan.wu@...log.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH take #5] [libata] libata driver for bf548 on chip ATAPI
controller.
On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 14:56 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 8/16/07, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:
> >> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >>> On 8/16/07, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:
> >>>> Sonic Zhang wrote:
> >>>>> +static void bfin_set_piomode(struct ata_port *ap, struct ata_device *adev)
> >>>>> +{
> >>>>> + int mode = adev->pio_mode - XFER_PIO_0;
> >>>>> + unsigned long base = (unsigned long)ap->ioaddr.ctl_addr;
> >>>> (added Bryan Wu to CC)
> >>>>
> >>>> Someone needs to need fix the bfin architecture: the addresses on the
> >>>> bfin_read/bfin_write functions should be 'void __iomem *' not unsigned long.
> >>> there are no address pointers anymore, so there is nothing to cast ...
> >>> the bfin_read/bfin_write macros are done in sexy asm:
> >>> #define bfin_write8(addr,val) __asm__ __volatile__("b[%0] = %1;" ::
> >>> "a"(addr), "d"(val))
> >>> or i'm misunderstanding what you mean ...
> >>>
> >>> where do you see (unsigned long) ?
> >> Look up (into the message you quoted).
> >
> > yes, you quoted the driver, not the Blackfin core parts
> >
> >> Regardless of the implementation, the C type system should be employed
> >> to ensure that 'addr' is known to the compiler as 'void __iomem *'
> >> rather than unsigned long.
> >
> > i agree the specific pata driver should be declared the way you
> > described, however i dont see how that has bearing on the
> > bfin_read/bfin_write macros as you seemed to indicate
>
> Macros completely ignore the C type system. Look at other architectures
> if you cannot figure out how to implement a static inline with stronger
> typing.
>
> Jeff
>
Yes, Jeff is right. Type checking in C is very useful.
So,
a) our register access function: bfin_read8/16/32 and bfin_write8/16/32
macros should be change to inline functions.
b) the "addr" should be defined as "void __iomem *"
c) in these functions it may use the sexy asm stuff
How do you think of this, Mike? And am I right, Jeff?
Thanks
- Bryan Wu
>
-
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