[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m3hazb3dii.fsf@intrepid.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:58:29 +0100
From: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
To: Andrea Shepard <andrea@...sephoneslair.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
davem@...emloft.net, mmarek@...e.cz, jkosina@...e.cz,
joe@...ches.com, justinmattock@...il.com, gregkh@...e.de,
alan@...ux.intel.com, jdmason@...zu.us
Subject: Re: [03/22] Cyclades PC300 driver: Fix usage of types
Hi,
Andrea Shepard <andrea@...sephoneslair.org> writes:
> +++ b/drivers/net/wan/hd64572.h
> @@ -172,11 +172,11 @@
>
> /* Block Descriptor Structure */
> typedef struct {
> - unsigned long next; /* pointer to next block descriptor */
> - unsigned long ptbuf; /* buffer pointer */
> - unsigned short len; /* data length */
> - unsigned char status; /* status */
> - unsigned char filler[5]; /* alignment filler (16 bytes) */
> + u32 next; /* pointer to next block descriptor */
> + u32 ptbuf; /* buffer pointer */
> + u16 len; /* data length */
> + u8 status; /* status */
> + u8 filler[5]; /* alignment filler (16 bytes) */
> } pcsca_bd_t;
Perhaps you could just use the following struct which is already in the
file:
/* Block Descriptor Structure */
typedef struct {
u32 cp; /* pointer to next block descriptor */
u32 bp; /* buffer pointer */
u16 len; /* data length */
u8 stat; /* status */
u8 unused; /* pads to 4-byte boundary */
}pkt_desc;
The difference is a different alignment (4 bytes vs 16 bytes) but
I think it's been verified (both docs and real hw) that 32-bit alignment
is ok with these chips.
> +#define cpc_writeb(port, val) {writeb((u8)(val), \
> + (void __iomem *)(port)); mb(); }
> +#define cpc_writew(port, val) {writew((u16)(val), \
> + (void __iomem *)(port)); mb(); }
> +#define cpc_writel(port, val) {writel((u32)(val), \
> + (void __iomem *)(port)); mb(); }
Are these mb() needed? I think write[bwl] and read[bwl] are already
memory barriers.
PCI write posting is a different thing of course and you may need e.g.
a PCI read in some timing-critical parts of the code.
> #else /* __KERNEL__ */
> -#define cpc_writeb(port,val) (*(volatile ucchar *)(port) = (ucchar)(val))
> -#define cpc_writew(port,val) (*(volatile ucshort *)(port) = (ucshort)(val))
> -#define cpc_writel(port,val) (*(volatile uclong *)(port) = (uclong)(val))
> +#define cpc_writeb(port, val) (*(u8 *)(port) = (u8)(val))
> +#define cpc_writew(port, val) (*(u16 *)(port) = (u16)(val))
> +#define cpc_writel(port, val) (*(u32 *)(port) = (u32)(val))
>
> -#define cpc_readb(port) (*(volatile ucchar *)(port))
> -#define cpc_readw(port) (*(volatile ucshort *)(port))
> -#define cpc_readl(port) (*(volatile uclong *)(port))
> +#define cpc_readb(port) (*(u8 *)(port))
> +#define cpc_readw(port) (*(u16 *)(port))
> +#define cpc_readl(port) (*(u32 *)(port))
I'm not sure the kernel headers are a good place for such things.
> void tx_dma_stop(pc300_t * card, int ch)
> {
> - uclong scabase = card->hw.scabase;
> - ucchar drr_ena_bit = 1 << (5 + 2 * ch);
> - ucchar drr_rst_bit = 1 << (1 + 2 * ch);
> + uintptr_t scabase = (uintptr_t)(card->hw.scabase);
> + u8 drr_ena_bit = 1 << (5 + 2 * ch);
> + u8 drr_rst_bit = 1 << (1 + 2 * ch);
uintptr_t? Is it simply an unsigned int *?
--
Krzysztof Halasa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists