[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <401cdb64-6fdb-be30-b8bc-bf51c1a35074@deltatee.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:09:55 -0600
From: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
To: Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ntb@...glegroups.com, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] alpha: provide ioread64 and iowrite64 implementations
On 6/22/2017 2:08 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> But this does not do the same thing as an ioread64 with regards to
> atomicity or side effects on the device. The same is true of the other
> hacks. You either have a real 64bit single read/write from MMIO space or
> you don't. You can't fake it.
Yes, I know. But is it not better than having every driver that wants to
use these functions fake it themselves?
Logan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists