![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
> The _only_ reason to use "ioread32be()" would be because the machine is > actually natively BE, and you want to avoid swab. That's kind of the point > of using "be32_to_cpu(__raw_readl(addr)))" like we do now - it will do the > byte swap only if it's necessary. > > In contrast, your "swab(readl())" does _two_ byteswaps - once to turn it > into LE, then to turn it back into BE. I'm not doing a swab(readl()), I'm doing a swab(insl()) and have the arch provide a native BE accessor for readl_be(). The idea is that I don't want to add _be accessors for PIO and PIO is slow anyway. But I'm providing one for MMIO, along with the repeat versions. Have a second look. > So if we can't just rip it out, then we sure as hell shouldn't replace it > with something that is obviously worse either. > > In other words - I don't see the reasoning here again. You seem to want to > make the code just worse. Wait, let's make thing clear, there are 2 things here: - MMIO : For that, I'm providing readw_be etc... which my patch defines based on __raw_* just as your suggest, I'm just adding a way for the arch to provide its own. - PIO : This is broken -now-. The current code doesn't swap at all in the PIO case, thus you get LE result when using ioread32be() on PIO. I propose to fix that with swab() because PIO sucks already, there is no "__raw" for PIO and it doesn't deserve new accessors nor speed. Cheers, Ben. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-11-05 04:43 [W:0.145 / U:0.000 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||