lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [May]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 00/18] Cross-architecture definitions of relaxed MMIO accessors
From
Date
On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 20:34 +0100, Will Deacon wrote:

> Do you mean the io{read,write} functions? Funnily enough, they're already
> relaxed on ARM if you go by the semantics I've proposed. That implies we at
> least need some Documentation to that effect...
>
> What do you do on ppc?

They are not supposed to be relaxed. If they are, you probably have a
whole lot of busted drivers :-)

They have the same semantics as readl/writel for memory and as inb/outb
for IO space, they just allow to hide the "type" (memory vs. IO) from
most of the driver code.

We probably need to create a set of _relaxed variants.

Cheers,
Ben.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-05-27 23:21    [W:0.109 / U:0.264 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site