[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140719084152.GA31564@ravnborg.org>
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 10:41:52 +0200
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] asm-generic/io.h: Implement generic
{read,write}s*()
> >
> > This set:
> > #define inb_p(addr) inb(addr)
> > #define inw_p(addr) inw(addr)
> > #define inl_p(addr) inl(addr)
> > #define outb_p(x, addr) outb((x), (addr))
> > #define outw_p(x, addr) outw((x), (addr))
> > #define outl_p(x, addr) outl((x), (addr))
> >
> > Should have a comment that say they are deprecated.
> > Especially the "b" variants still have many users.
>
> Are they? I don't remember ever seeing a reason to deprecate
> them. We could perhaps enclose them in #ifdef CONFIG_ISA, but
> there may also be some drivers that use the same code for ISA
> and PCI, and it doesn't really hurt on PCI.
It is my understanding that inl and inl_p are the same these days.
A quick grep indicate that only m68k define the
_p variant different from the other.
But I failed to find and description of the difference between the
two which is why I assumed they were identical and thus no need for both.
Sam
--
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