Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 1 Sep 2006 21:43:43 +0100 | From | Russell King <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.18-rc5-mm1: drivers/infiniband/hw/amso1100/c2.c compile error |
| |
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 01:04:44PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 12:53:47 -0700 > Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com> wrote: > > Yes, I agree that's a good plan, especially the documentation part. > > However I would argue that what's in drivers/infiniband/hw/mthca/mthca_doorbell.h > > is legitimate: the driver uses __raw_writeq() when it exists and uses > > two __raw_writel()s properly serialized with a device-specific lock to > > get exactly the atomicity it needs on 32-bit archs. > > No, driver-specific workarounds are not legitimate, sorry. > > The driver should simply fail to compile on architectures which do not > implement __raw_writeq().
So, what you're basically saying is that on architectures which can _NOT_ implement an atomic __raw_writeq(), certain drivers simply will not be available?
> We can speed up the process by sending helpful emails to architecture > maintainers, but they'll notice either way.
I think you're completely wrong in the context of the message you're replying to - it's talking about an _atomic_ 64-bit write.
Sure, if you want a _non-atomic_ 64-bit write then that's possible, but many 32-bit architectures can't do a 64-bit atomic IO write and that isn't something they can "fix".
-- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
-- VGER BF report: H 5.55112e-17 - 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/
| |