On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > Make the generic lib/iomap.c use arch provided MMIO accessors when > available for big endian and repeat operations. Also while at it, > fix the *_be version which are currently broken for PIO Just rip the _be versions out, methinks. Also, what does your "writesb()" actually look like? I assume it's the exact same thing as the generic one, with just another barrier. No? Linus - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
- Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
- Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- References:
- lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
- Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- From: Russell King <[email protected]>
- Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
- Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
- Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
- lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- Prev by Date: Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- Next by Date: Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- Previous by thread: Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- Next by thread: Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors
- Index(es):
 |