From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: eric.y.miao@gmail.com (Eric Miao)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 10:06:33 +0800
Subject: Question: locomo_{read/write}l macros
In-Reply-To: <BD79186B4FD85F4B8E60E381CAEE1909020E8DFF@mi8nycmail19.Mi8.com>
References: <BD79186B4FD85F4B8E60E381CAEE1909020E8DFF@mi8nycmail19.Mi8.com>
Message-ID: <f17812d71001201806n216cf13akbf58a671fb22c8d3@mail.gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 5:33 AM, H Hartley Sweeten
<hartleys@visionengravers.com> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Is there a reason why the locomo stuff is using custom
> macros for {read/write}l access?
>

No.

> In arch/arm/include/asm/hardware/locomo.h:
>
> #define locomo_writel(val,addr) ({ *(volatile u16 *)(addr) = (val); })
> #define locomo_readl(addr) ? ? ?(*(volatile u16 *)(addr))
>
> It appears that these are just non-typesafe versions of the
> __raw_{read/write}w macros in arch/arm/include/asm/io.h:
>
> #define __raw_writew(v,a) ? ? ? (__chk_io_ptr(a), *(volatile unsigned short __force *)(a) = (v))
> #define __raw_readw(a) ? ? ? ? ?(__chk_io_ptr(a), *(volatile unsigned short __force *)(a))
>
> Is there any reason not to change them all (other than
> having to then fix all the callers to be typesafe)?
>
> It appears the only users are in:
>
> arch/arm/common/locomo.c
> arch/arm/include/asm/hardware/locomo.h
> drivers/input/keyboard/locomokbd.c
> drivers/leds/leds-locomo.c
> drivers/video/backlight/locomolcd.c
>

They are "many" users instead of "only" I'm afraid. Thomas Cc'ed
may have some additional out-of-tree drivers, but yeah, I'd agree
that we fixed these in-tree driver first.