From: hch@lst.de (Christoph Hellwig)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v5 2/6] arch: unify ioremap prototypes and macro aliases
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 08:23:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150701062352.GA3739@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4h5OXyRvZvLGD5ZknO-YUPn675YGv0XdtW1QOO9qmZsug@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 03:57:16PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > void __iomem *ioremap_flags(resource_size_t offset, unsigned long size,
> > unsigned long prot_val, unsigned flags);
>
> Doesn't 'flags' imply a specific 'prot_val'?
Looks like the values are arch specific. So as a first step I'd like
to keep them separate. As a second step we could look into unifying
the actual ioremap implementations which look mostly the same. Once
that is done we could look into collapsing the flags and prot_val
arguments.
> One useful feature of the ifdef mess as implemented in the patch is
> that you could test for whether ioremap_cache() is actually
> implemented or falls back to default ioremap(). I think for
> completeness archs should publish an ioremap type capabilities mask
> for drivers that care... (I can imagine pmem caring), or default to
> being permissive if something like IOREMAP_STRICT is not set. There's
> also the wrinkle of archs that can only support certain types of
> mappings at a given alignment.
I think doing this at runtime might be a better idea. E.g. a
ioremap_flags with the CACHED argument will return -EOPNOTSUP unless
actually implemented. On various architectures different CPUs or
boards will have different capabilities in this area.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-01 6:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20150622081028.35954.89885.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.jf.intel.com>
[not found] ` <20150622082427.35954.73529.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.jf.intel.com>
[not found] ` <20150622161002.GB8240@lst.de>
2015-06-30 22:57 ` [PATCH v5 2/6] arch: unify ioremap prototypes and macro aliases Dan Williams
2015-07-01 6:23 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2015-07-01 6:55 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-01 6:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-07-01 7:19 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-01 7:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-07-07 9:50 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-07 10:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-07-07 10:27 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-07 16:07 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-07 23:10 ` Toshi Kani
2015-07-09 1:40 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-09 23:43 ` Toshi Kani
2015-07-01 8:09 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-07-01 16:47 ` Dan Williams
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=20150701062352.GA3739@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--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).