From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 10:03:18 -0700 From: Matt Porter To: John Whitney , linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: Proposed changes to io.h Message-ID: <20040331100318.B17284@home.com> References: <49B568CB-832A-11D8-9FF0-000A95A07384@sands-edge.com> <20040331164423.GA417@gate.ebshome.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20040331164423.GA417@gate.ebshome.net>; from ebs@ebshome.net on Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 08:44:23AM -0800 Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 08:44:23AM -0800, Eugene Surovegin wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 10:44:25AM -0500, John Whitney wrote: > > 2. I'd like to add 64-bit __raw_readll and __raw_writell routines to > > io.h, done using floating-point registers. Currently, modules such as > > MTD (when writing to 64-bit buses) perform two 32-bit, non-atomic > > writes, which can cause problems. Using a floating-point register to > > guarantee a 64-bit write is ugly, but it works. Code for these inlined > > routines is as follows: > > [snip] > > I wonder will it work on 4xx CPUs which don't have floating point unit? #ifndef CONFIG_PPC_CLASSIC_FPU? -Matt ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/