From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Dooks Subject: Re: [Linux-kernel] [PATCH 12/13] mmc: atmel-mci: use endian agnostic IO Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 12:53:41 +0000 Message-ID: <55115E55.4090409@codethink.co.uk> References: <1426693992-31163-1-git-send-email-ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk> <1426693992-31163-13-git-send-email-ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk> <1426774966.22122.47.camel@xylophone.i.decadent.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ducie-dc1.codethink.co.uk ([185.25.241.215]:51481 "EHLO ducie-dc1.codethink.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751980AbbCXMxq (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2015 08:53:46 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1426774966.22122.47.camel@xylophone.i.decadent.org.uk> Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: Ben Hutchings Cc: linux-kernel@lists.codethink.co.uk, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Ulf Hansson , linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, Chris Ball , Ludovic Desroches , Haavard Skinnemoen , Hans-Christian Egtvedt On 19/03/15 14:22, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Wed, 2015-03-18 at 15:53 +0000, Ben Dooks wrote: >> Change the __raw IO functions to endian agnostic relaxed ones to allow >> the driver to function on big endian ARM systems. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks >> -- >> CC: Ludovic Desroches >> CC: Chris Ball >> CC: Ulf Hansson >> CC: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org >> --- >> drivers/mmc/host/atmel-mci-regs.h | 9 ++++++++- >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/atmel-mci-regs.h b/drivers/mmc/host/atmel-mci-regs.h >> index c97001e..711bb53 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/atmel-mci-regs.h >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/atmel-mci-regs.h >> @@ -135,10 +135,17 @@ >> #define ATMCI_REGS_SIZE 0x100 >> >> /* Register access macros */ >> -#define atmci_readl(port,reg) \ >> +#ifdef CONFIG_AVR32 >> +#define atmci_readl(port,reg) \ >> __raw_readl((port)->regs + reg) >> #define atmci_writel(port,reg,value) \ >> __raw_writel((value), (port)->regs + reg) >> +#else >> +#define atmci_readl(port,reg) \ >> + readl_relaxed((port)->regs + reg) >> +#define atmci_writel(port,reg,value) \ >> + writel_relaxed((value), (port)->regs + reg) >> +#endif > > This pattern is repeated in a lot of drivers; is it worth defining > atmel_{read,write}l_relaxed() in a common header? > > #ifdef CONFIG_AVR32 > > /* CPU and peripherals are both big-endian, so don't byte-swap */ > #define atmel_readl_relaxed(addr) __raw_readl(addr) > #define atmel_writel_relaxed(value, addr) __raw_writel(value, addr) > > #else > > /* Peripherals are little-endian, so byte-swap if CPU isn't */ > #define atmel_readl_relaxed(addr) readl_relaxed(addr) > #define atmel_writel_relaxed(value, addr) writel_relaxed(value, addr) > > #endif > > Ben. Hi, I think it will probably be a good idea to have an avr32/at91 read/write functions however I will put this forward as a separate series as it will require both avr32 and at91 maintainers as well as driver updates. how about: atmel_readl_onchip{b,w,l} atmel_writel_onchip{b,w,l} -- Ben Dooks http://www.codethink.co.uk/ Senior Engineer Codethink - Providing Genius