From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@gmail.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clarify pci_iomap() usage for MMIO-only devices
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:25:42 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0709181515230.16478@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0709181439190.16478@woody.linux-foundation.org>
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> I just think that proliferation of IO interfaces is a bad idea.
Side note: just allowing readl/writel on the iomap'ed pointers obviously
avoids that proliferation, but iomap really is architecture-specific, so
not only will different architectures act very differently, it's not
necessarily the case that iomap() will always have the same pointer as the
old ioremap(), even though the routines in the *default* implementation in
lib/iomap.c do that.
In fact, for IO port accesses, we already do some debugging to make sure
that people don't misuse the iomap() interfaces (ie the whole "Bad IO
access.." thing). I could well see the same thing happening for MMIO under
some debugging option, explicitly using some high bits in a 64-bit address
as a cookie - and that would make using regular readl/writel on the cookie
just fail spectacularly.
That said, it does seem unlikely (ie if we added a cookie for MMIO
pointers, we'd probably do it *both* for iomap and for ioremap(), and
readl/writel would continue to work). So in practice the readl/writel
probably works.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-18 22:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-17 20:22 [PATCH] Clarify pci_iomap() usage for MMIO-only devices Luis R. Rodriguez
2007-09-18 10:34 ` Alan Cox
2007-09-18 18:46 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2007-09-18 19:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 19:07 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2007-09-18 19:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 20:12 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2007-09-18 20:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 21:02 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2007-09-18 21:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 21:30 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-18 21:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 22:25 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2007-09-18 22:21 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-09-18 22:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 20:21 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-18 22:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-09-18 23:08 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-18 23:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 22:16 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-09-18 22:25 ` Alan Cox
2007-09-19 15:07 ` Nick Kossifidis
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=alpine.LFD.0.999.0709181515230.16478@woody.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=mcgrof@gmail.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