[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120612220654.fd0246e6e687f7c79e5c988c@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 22:06:54 +0900
From: Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@...il.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya@....ntt.co.jp>,
bhutchings@...arflare.com, grundler@...isc-linux.org,
avi@...hat.com, mtosatti@...hat.com,
linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] drivers/net/ethernet/sfc: Add efx_ prefix to
set_bit_le()
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:09:15 +0000
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> On Monday 11 June 2012, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> >
> > /* Set bit in a little-endian bitfield */
> > -static inline void set_bit_le(unsigned nr, unsigned char *addr)
> > +static inline void efx_set_bit_le(unsigned nr, unsigned char *addr)
> > {
> > addr[nr / 8] |= (1 << (nr % 8));
> > }
> >
> > /* Clear bit in a little-endian bitfield */
> > -static inline void clear_bit_le(unsigned nr, unsigned char *addr)
> > +static inline void efx_clear_bit_le(unsigned nr, unsigned char *addr)
> > {
> > addr[nr / 8] &= ~(1 << (nr % 8));
> > }
>
> Hmm, any reason why we're not just using the existing non-atomic
> __set_bit_le() here? I think the helpers in sfc and tulip can
> just get removed if you use those.
__set_bit_le() assumes long word alignment and does endian conversion
when needed.
To be honest, I am a bit scared of changing drivers which I cannot test
on real hardware.
Takuya
--
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