Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Opinion on ordering of writel vs. stores to RAM | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | Tue, 12 Sep 2006 10:49:07 +1000 |
| |
> It's silly because if you just use different interface > names for the different semantics, the caller can > ask for what he wants at the call site and no conditionals > are needed in the implementation.
As Paulus also pointed out, having writel() behave differently based on some magic done earlier at map time makes it harder to understand what happens when reading the code, and thus harder to audit drivers for missing barriers etc... since it's not obvious at first sight wether a driver is using ordered or relaxed semantics. Thus I prefer keeping two speparate interfaces.
We've come up with the __writel() name, but I'm open to proposals for something nicer :)
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/
| |