Re: [PATCH] Introduce __iowrite32_copy

Re: [PATCH] Introduce __iowrite32_copy

[Olaf Hering]

 On Wed, Feb 01, Linux Kernel Mailing List wrote:

> tree c4d797b413bb6f8a1b8507213294a291ab5114f8
> parent f7589f28d7dd4586b4e90ac3b2a180409669053a
> author Bryan O'Sullivan <bos@pathscale.com> Wed, 01 Feb 2006 19:05:16 -0800
> committer Linus Torvalds <torvalds@g5.osdl.org> Thu, 02 Feb 2006 00:53:13 -0800
> 
> [PATCH] Introduce __iowrite32_copy
> 
> This arch-independent routine copies data to a memory-mapped I/O region,
> using 32-bit accesses.  The naming is double-underscored to make it clear
> that it does not guarantee write ordering, nor does it perform a memory
> barrier afterwards; the kernel doc also explicitly states this.  This style
> of access is required by some devices.
> 
> This change also introduces include/linux/io.h, at Andrew's suggestion.  It
> only has one occupant at the moment, but is a logical destination for
> oft-replicated contents of include/asm-*/{io,iomap}.h to migrate to.

> +++ b/lib/iomap_copy.c

> +void __attribute__((weak)) __iowrite32_copy(void __iomem *to,
> +					    const void *from,
> +					    size_t count)
> +{
> +	u32 __iomem *dst = to;
> +	const u32 *src = from;
> +	const u32 *end = src + count;
> +
> +	while (src < end)
> +		__raw_writel(*src++, dst++);
> +}

lib/iomap_copy.c: In function '__iowrite32_copy':
lib/iomap_copy.c:40: error: implicit declaration of function '__raw_writel'

We compile with -Werror-implicit-function-declaration, and s390 does not
have a __raw_writel.
Should it just define __raw_writel to writel, like uml does a few
commits later?

-- 
short story of a lazy sysadmin:
 alias appserv=wotan

Re: [PATCH] Introduce __iowrite32_copy

[Heiko Carstens]

> lib/iomap_copy.c: In function '__iowrite32_copy':
> lib/iomap_copy.c:40: error: implicit declaration of function '__raw_writel'
> 
> We compile with -Werror-implicit-function-declaration, and s390 does not
> have a __raw_writel.
> Should it just define __raw_writel to writel, like uml does a few
> commits later?

I sent a patch which fixes this for s390 earlier today.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/2/2/78

Thanks,
Heiko

Re: [PATCH] Introduce __iowrite32_copy

[Bryan O'Sullivan]

On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 15:57 +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:

> I sent a patch which fixes this for s390 earlier today.
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/2/2/78

Thanks.

	<b

Re: [PATCH] Introduce __iowrite32_copy

[Al Viro]

On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 03:57:20PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > lib/iomap_copy.c: In function '__iowrite32_copy':
> > lib/iomap_copy.c:40: error: implicit declaration of function '__raw_writel'
> > 
> > We compile with -Werror-implicit-function-declaration, and s390 does not
> > have a __raw_writel.
> > Should it just define __raw_writel to writel, like uml does a few
> > commits later?
> 
> I sent a patch which fixes this for s390 earlier today.
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/2/2/78

Which leaves mips, m68k and sh64...  For m68k cross-builds I've added
#define __raw_writel raw_outl in raw_io.h, but I'm not sure if m68k
folks are OK with that.  Comments?

Re: [PATCH] Introduce __iowrite32_copy

[Kars de Jong]

On vr, 2006-02-03 at 06:30 +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 03:57:20PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > > lib/iomap_copy.c: In function '__iowrite32_copy':
> > > lib/iomap_copy.c:40: error: implicit declaration of function '__raw_writel'
> > > 
> > > We compile with -Werror-implicit-function-declaration, and s390 does not
> > > have a __raw_writel.
> > > Should it just define __raw_writel to writel, like uml does a few
> > > commits later?
> > 
> > I sent a patch which fixes this for s390 earlier today.
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/2/2/78
> 
> Which leaves mips, m68k and sh64...  For m68k cross-builds I've added
> #define __raw_writel raw_outl in raw_io.h, but I'm not sure if m68k
> folks are OK with that.  Comments?

That's exactly what I have done in my local tree for the 53c700 driver
which uses the interfaces of lib/iomap.c, so it's fine with me.


Kind regards,

Kars.