linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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.

  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).