[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0805301120510.26332@anakin>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 11:22:19 +0200 (CEST)
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Haavard Skinnemoen <haavard.skinnemoen@...el.com>
cc: benh@...nel.crashing.org, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
scottwood@...escale.com, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tpiepho@...escale.com
Subject: Re: MMIO and gcc re-ordering issue
On Fri, 30 May 2008, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> Maybe we need another interface that does not do byteswapping but
> provides stronger ordering guarantees?
The byte swapping depends on the device/bus.
So what happened to the old idea of putting the accessor function pointers
in the device/bus structure?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
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