On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 01:04:44PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 12:53:47 -0700
> Roland Dreier <[email protected]> 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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]