From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 22/24] scsi: eesox: use __iomem pointers for MMIO Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 08:09:58 +0000 Message-ID: <201209180809.58542.arnd@arndb.de> References: <201209150800.35605.arnd@arndb.de> <201209151030.44105.arnd@arndb.de> <20120917220334.GU12245@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120917220334.GU12245@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon , Nicolas Pitre , "James E.J. Bottomley" , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Monday 17 September 2012, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > In both of my replies, I've said "as x86 does". We need to follow > x86's behaviour here, which is as I've quoted - it's not a matter > that "I need to make up my mind" - my mind is already well made up. > That is, we need to follow x86 here. > > That is, const volatile void __iomem * for reads, and volatile void > __iomem * for writes. Ok, I'll keep the patch in the series then, as it only changes the pointer that we do an MMIO write on, not the ones for MMIO read. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 08:09:58 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 22/24] scsi: eesox: use __iomem pointers for MMIO In-Reply-To: <20120917220334.GU12245@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <201209150800.35605.arnd@arndb.de> <201209151030.44105.arnd@arndb.de> <20120917220334.GU12245@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <201209180809.58542.arnd@arndb.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Monday 17 September 2012, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > In both of my replies, I've said "as x86 does". We need to follow > x86's behaviour here, which is as I've quoted - it's not a matter > that "I need to make up my mind" - my mind is already well made up. > That is, we need to follow x86 here. > > That is, const volatile void __iomem * for reads, and volatile void > __iomem * for writes. Ok, I'll keep the patch in the series then, as it only changes the pointer that we do an MMIO write on, not the ones for MMIO read. Arnd