Re: lib/iomap.c mmio_{in,out}s* vs. __raw_* accessors

> Ok, your patch builds fine here. I can't test at the moment as I don't
> have a machine at hand that has a device whose driver uses the ops in
> iomap though, but I can't see any reason why it wouldn't work if it
> builds, so as far as I'm concerned, that's good to go in 2.6.20.
> (earlier if you wish but I won't submit the patch doing the powerpc
> changes that makes me use those change before 2.6.20 obviously :-)

In fact, you might want to push it to 2.6.19 since it fixes a bug
(current _be operations are incorrect for PIO without the patch).

Cheers,
Ben.

-
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: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

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]>
- 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: 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: 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]>

Prev by Date: Re: New filesystem for Linux
Next by Date: Re: PATCH? hrtimer_wakeup: fix a theoretical race wrt rt_mutex_slowlock()
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):
- Date
- Thread

[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]