From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com (Ezequiel Garcia)
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 17:49:43 -0300
Subject: [PATCH v5 1/3] ARM: Introduce atomic MMIO modify
In-Reply-To: <20131210170025.GA4360@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1386686497-20335-1-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>
 <1386686497-20335-2-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>
 <20131210164907.GA11468@sirena.org.uk>
 <20131210170025.GA4360@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Message-ID: <20131211204942.GF5461@localhost>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 05:00:25PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 04:49:07PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:41:35AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> > 
> > > +void atomic_io_modify_relaxed(void __iomem *reg, u32 mask, u32 set)
> > > +{
> > > +	unsigned long flags;
> > > +	u32 value;
> > > +
> > > +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&__io_lock, flags);
> > > +	value = readl_relaxed(reg) & ~mask;
> > > +	value |= (set & mask);
> > > +	writel_relaxed(value, reg);
> > > +	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&__io_lock, flags);
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(atomic_io_modify_relaxed);
> > 
> > This looks quite generic - why is it in architecture specific code?
> 
> because the _relaxed IO operators don't exist on other architectures, and
> there's been some discussion around whether they should with no conclusions
> being reached.

Exactly.

Will? Catalin? Any comments on this?

-- 
Ezequiel Garc?a, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering
http://free-electrons.com