From: Julian Vetter <jvetter@kalrayinc.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Julian Vetter <jvetter@kalrayinc.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, guoren <guoren@kernel.org>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
WANG Xuerui <kernel@xen0n.name>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-csky@vger.kernel.org,
loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
Yann Sionneau <ysionneau@kalrayinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/5] Consolidate __memcpy_{to,from}io and __memset_io into iomap_copy.c
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 10:19:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b9f3f692-d4fa-473b-9bdf-4ea73b22ccde@kalrayinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f47e66f9-ec20-4e75-b88f-d412339e797d@app.fastmail.com>
On 26.09.24 09:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2024, at 13:24, Julian Vetter wrote:
>> Various architectures have almost the same implementations for
>> __memcpy_{to,from}io and __memset_io functions. So, consolidate them
>> into the existing lib/iomap_copy.c.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Yann Sionneau <ysionneau@kalrayinc.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Julian Vetter <jvetter@kalrayinc.com>
>> ---
>> Signed-off-by: Julian Vetter <jvetter@kalrayinc.com>
>
> You have a duplicated signoff here.
Yes, thank you. I will remove it in the next patch revision.
>
>
>> +#ifndef __memcpy_fromio
>> +void __memcpy_fromio(void *to, const volatile void __iomem *from,
>> size_t count);
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +#ifndef __memcpy_toio
>> +void __memcpy_toio(volatile void __iomem *to, const void *from, size_t
>> count);
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +#ifndef __memset_io
>> +void __memset_io(volatile void __iomem *dst, int c, size_t count);
>> +#endif
>
> I'm not entirely sure about the purpose of the #ifdef here, since
> nothing ever overrides the double-underscore versions, both before
> and after your patches.
>
> Unless I'm missing something here, I think a more logical
> sequence would be:
>
> 1. add the definitions in this file without the underscores,
by: "...in this file..." you mean the 'lib/iomap_copy.c' file, right?
But what if an architecture does not select 'CONFIG_HAS_IOMEM'. Then
'iomap_copy.c' is not compiled and we don't have an implementation,
right? I tried to compile with ARCH=um, with some MTD chip driver, like
the robot did and it indeed fails, because um has 'NO_IOMEM' set. and
the driver uses memcpy_fromio. I mean it's a strange combination,
because apparently we try to use IO memory? Is this an invalid
combination? But shouldn't the driver then 'depends on HAS_IOMEM'?
> as memcpy_fromio/memcpy_toio/memset_io, with the #ifdef
> for that name that is always set at this point
>
Right. I will remove it in my next patch revision.
> 2. replace the default implementation in asm-generic/io.h
> with extern prototypes, remove the #define from those
>
Yes, I have done this now.
> 3. convert the other architectures, removing both the
> implementations and the prototypes.
>
I have removed the prototypes and have aligned the function arguments in
m68k, alpha, parisc, and sh, which all have their own implementation,
but had slightly different function arguments. Btw, I have not removed
their implementations because some of them seem to have optimized
implementations (e.g., alpha and m68k), that I didn't want to touch. But
you're right others (e.g., sh) just do byte wise accesses and have a
comment "This needs to be optimized." Maybe I should remove these and
let them use the new version?!
> Arnd
>
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-27 8:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-25 13:24 [PATCH v6 0/5] Consolidate IO memcpy functions Julian Vetter
2024-09-25 13:24 ` [PATCH v6 1/5] Consolidate __memcpy_{to,from}io and __memset_io into iomap_copy.c Julian Vetter
2024-09-26 7:14 ` Arnd Bergmann
2024-09-27 8:19 ` Julian Vetter [this message]
2024-09-27 10:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2024-09-29 20:37 ` David Laight
2024-09-25 13:24 ` [PATCH v6 2/5] Replace generic memcpy and memset by IO memcpy functions Julian Vetter
2024-09-27 5:28 ` kernel test robot
2024-09-27 5:49 ` kernel test robot
2024-09-25 13:24 ` [PATCH v6 3/5] arm64: Use generic io " Julian Vetter
2024-09-25 13:24 ` [PATCH v6 4/5] csky: " Julian Vetter
2024-09-26 3:22 ` Guo Ren
2024-09-25 13:24 ` [PATCH v6 5/5] loongarch: " Julian Vetter
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=b9f3f692-d4fa-473b-9bdf-4ea73b22ccde@kalrayinc.com \
--to=jvetter@kalrayinc.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
--cc=guoren@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel@xen0n.name \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-csky@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=loongarch@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=ysionneau@kalrayinc.com \
/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