Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 22 May 1998 10:54:32 +0200 | From | Janos Farkas <Janos.Farkas-nouce/priv-#> | Subject | Re: port_t again, sorry didn't type the whole thing. |
| |
On 1998-05-22 at 08:15:15, Tigran Aivazian wrote: > Let's have an architecture-specific type called port_t that is > typedefed to the appropriate type (unsigned short on i386, unsigned > long on alpha etc) and redeclare all the in/out stuff in io.h to use > port_t (as well as check all the (million?) lines of .c files to make > sure they use the proper declaration. This looks a tiny bit cleaner > than the current state.
The I/O port number range, thus the C type needed to represent it is not just a function of the CPU architecture, but more so of the bus type (think PCI). Also (IMHO), the in/out routines/macros are not quite useful for multiple (I/O) buses reachable through bridges. Although handling these "extra" situations seems to be uninteresting for almost everyone but me.. :)
[Ah, no more "out of control commercial b.s."? Thank you! :)]
-- Janos - Don't worry, my address is real. I'm just bored of spam.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |