[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0053d22a-c2b2-2bfa-645b-f0131ea85696@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:43:51 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florinel Iordache <florinel.iordache@....com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, hkallweit1@...il.com,
linux@...linux.org.uk, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
mark.rutland@....com, kuba@...nel.org, corbet@....net,
shawnguo@...nel.org, leoyang.li@....com, madalin.bucur@....nxp.com,
ioana.ciornei@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 6/9] net: phy: add backplane kr driver support
On 3/26/2020 6:07 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> +static u32 le_ioread32(void __iomem *reg)
>> +{
>> + return ioread32(reg);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void le_iowrite32(u32 value, void __iomem *reg)
>> +{
>> + iowrite32(value, reg);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static u32 be_ioread32(void __iomem *reg)
>> +{
>> + return ioread32be(reg);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void be_iowrite32(u32 value, void __iomem *reg)
>> +{
>> + iowrite32be(value, reg);
>> +}
>
> This is very surprising to me. I've not got my head around the
> structure of this code yet, but i'm surprised to see memory mapped
> access functions in generic code.
This abstraction makes no sense whatsoever, you already have
io{read,write}32{be,} to deal with the correct endian, and you can use
the standard Device Tree properties 'big-endian', 'little-endian',
'native-endian' to decide which of those of to use. If you need to
introduce a wrapper or indirect function calls to select the correct I/O
accessor, that is fine of course.
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists