Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 May 2014 21:34:28 +0100 | From | Will Deacon <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 00/18] Cross-architecture definitions of relaxed MMIO accessors |
| |
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 09:23:30PM +0100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > 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 :-)
Lucky me!
> 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.
Ok. I'll try putting together a v3 including this and the mmiowb work.
Thanks for the feedback,
Will
| |