From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: fix __io macro for PCMCIA
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 14:04:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120404130401.GU24211@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120404125624.GT24211@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 01:56:24PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:27:30AM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 04 April 2012, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 10:11:52PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > > With commit c334bc1 (ARM: make mach/io.h include optional), PCMCIA was
> > > > broken as PCMCIA depends on __io() being just a cast. This needs a better
> > > > fix with a fixed i/o address mapping, but for now we just restore things
> > > > to the previous behavior.
> > >
> > > And what about systems with PCI IO at non-zero offsets with cardbus/pcmcia?
> > > This is broken and your assumption above is wrong.
> >
> > I would think they all still use their own mach/io.h. Which ones are you
> > thinking of?
>
> But they don't need the IO_SPACE_LIMIT messed around with - it should
> remain at 64K not 4GB.
Actually, we've done the whole io.h removal in totally the wrong bloody
order - because in removing all these so-called unnecessary io.h headers,
we've removed all those IO_SPACE_LIMIT definitions which overrode the
generic ones.
What we should have done is sorted out the PCMCIA/PCI/ISA IO space _first_
before removing any mach/io.h headers.
The fix for this is to restore those io.h headers which defined
IO_SPACE_LIMIT to something else other than the asm/io.h default until
the proper process in the above paragraph has been followed, and not
to work around it by buggering with the generic - and correct -
definition.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-04 13:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-04 3:11 [PATCH] ARM: fix __io macro for PCMCIA Rob Herring
2012-04-04 7:55 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-04-04 9:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-04 10:27 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-04-04 12:56 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-04 13:04 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2012-04-04 13:47 ` Rob Herring
2012-04-04 14:16 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-04 10:02 ` Joachim Eastwood
2012-04-04 12:45 ` Rob Herring
2012-04-04 12:49 ` Joachim Eastwood
2012-04-04 11:05 ` Paul Parsons
2012-04-04 14:23 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-04 22:48 ` [PATCH v2] " Rob Herring
2012-04-04 23:03 ` Paul Parsons
2012-04-05 0:47 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-04-05 10:10 ` Joachim Eastwood
2012-04-05 18:29 ` Olof Johansson
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=20120404130401.GU24211@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).