public inbox for linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] asm-generic/io.h: Implement generic {read,write}s*()
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 09:44:09 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5913515.3g98ODuH6W@wuerfel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140718205953.GA21964@ravnborg.org>

On Friday 18 July 2014 22:59:53 Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 01:01:22PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> > 
> > Currently driver writers need to use io{read,write}{8,16,32}_rep() when
> > accessing FIFO registers portably. This is bad for two reasons: it is
> > inconsistent with how other registers are accessed using the standard
> > {read,write}{b,w,l}() functions, which can lead to confusion. On some
> > architectures the io{read,write}*() functions also need to perform some
> > extra checks to determine whether an address is memory-mapped or refers
> > to I/O space. Drivers which can be expected to never use I/O can safely
> > use the {read,write}s{b,w,l,q}(), just like they use their non-string
> > variants and there's no need for these extra checks.
> > 
> > This patch implements generic versions of readsb(), readsw(), readsl(),
> > readsq(), writesb(), writesw(), writesl() and writesq(). Variants of
> > these string functions for I/O accesses (ins*() and outs*() as well as
> > ioread*_rep() and iowrite*_rep()) are now implemented in terms of the
> > new functions.
> > 
> > Going forward, {read,write}{,s}{b,w,l,q}() should be used consistently
> > by drivers for devices that will only ever be memory-mapped and hence
> > don't need to access I/O space, whereas io{read,write}{8,16,32}_rep()
> > should be used by drivers for devices that can be either memory-mapped
> > or I/O-mapped.
> > 
> > While at it, also make sure that any of the functions provided as
> > fallback for architectures that don't override them can't be overridden
> > subsequently.
> > 
> > This is compile- and runtime-tested on 32-bit and 64-bit ARM and compile
> > tested on Microblaze, s390, SPARC and Xtensa. For ARC, Blackfin, Metag,
> > OpenRISC, Score and Unicore32 which also use asm-generic/io.h I couldn't
> > find or build a cross-compiler that would run on my system. But by code
> > inspection they shouldn't break with this patch.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> 
> Hi Thierry.
> 
> While browsing the resulting asm-generic/io.h it is irritating
> that the functions are messed up like they are.
> 
> From the start of the file the IO accessors are defined in following order:
> __raw_readb
> __raw_readw
> __raw_readl
> 
> readb
> readw
> readl
> 
> __raw_writeb
> __raw_writew
> __raw_writel
> 
> writeb
> writew
> writel
> 
> __raw_readq
> 
> readq
> 
> __raw_writeq
> 
> writeq
> 
> 
> See how strange it looks?

It saves one #ifdef CONFIG_64BIT to do it like this, but I guess
you are right that reordering them slightly would be nice here.

> A semi related question.
> Why do we play all these macro tricks in io.h?
> 
> Example:
> 
>     #define writeb __raw_writeb
> 
> The consensus these days is to use static inline to have the
> correct prototype but this file is contains a lot of these
> macro conversions.
> 
> All these things are not introduced by your patch but now that
> you show some love and care for this file maybe we could take
> the next step and bring more order to the current semi chaos?

The macros are mainly there so we can test their presence with
#ifdef. The interface is complex enough that there is probably
an architecture for any combination of overrides: most should
override the __raw_*() functions with inline assembly, but a lot
don't do that and it works because of implementation details of
the compiler. Some may need to override either readl() or
readl_relaxed() but not the other one.

For this reason, we want architecture-level files that include
the asm-generic version to use macros (or macro + inline function)
rather than a plain inline.

I was arguing earlier that we don't need the extra macros in the
asm-generic version, but it also doesn't hurt and it can make
it slightly easier for new architectures to copy the bits from
asm-generic they want to override.

	Arnd

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-07-19  7:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-16 11:01 [PATCH v3 1/3] asm-generic/io.h: Implement generic {read,write}s*() Thierry Reding
2014-07-16 11:01 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] ARM: Use include/asm-generic/io.h Thierry Reding
2014-07-16 11:01   ` Thierry Reding
2014-07-17 12:03   ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-16 11:01 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] arm64: " Thierry Reding
2014-07-17 12:04   ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-17 12:26     ` Thierry Reding
2014-07-18 15:50       ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-17 12:01 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] asm-generic/io.h: Implement generic {read,write}s*() Catalin Marinas
2014-07-18 20:59 ` Sam Ravnborg
2014-07-18 20:59   ` Sam Ravnborg
2014-07-18 21:06   ` Sam Ravnborg
2014-07-18 21:06     ` Sam Ravnborg
2014-07-19  7:38     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-07-19  8:41       ` Sam Ravnborg
2014-07-19  8:41         ` Sam Ravnborg
2014-07-19  9:05         ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-07-19  9:11           ` Sam Ravnborg
2014-07-19  9:11             ` Sam Ravnborg
2014-07-19 17:21             ` James Bottomley
2014-08-05  9:07             ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-08-05  9:14               ` Sam Ravnborg
2014-07-19  7:44   ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2014-07-19  8:53     ` Sam Ravnborg
2014-07-19  8:53       ` Sam Ravnborg
2014-07-19  9:10       ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-07-19 12:59   ` [PATCH] asm-generic/io.h: reorder funtions to form logical groups Sam Ravnborg
2014-08-01 14:09     ` Thierry Reding
2014-08-01 14:09       ` Thierry Reding
2014-08-01 22:42       ` Sam Ravnborg

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5913515.3g98ODuH6W@wuerfel \
    --to=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
    --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox