From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.202]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2A8167EB8 for ; Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:56:52 +1000 (EST) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i13so850265wra for ; Sat, 13 Aug 2005 20:56:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 20:56:50 -0700 From: Shawn Jin To: Matt Porter In-Reply-To: <20050812203335.K30033@cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: <20050812203335.K30033@cox.net> Cc: ppcembed Subject: Re: writel(), readl() in List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > read*()/write*() are accessors for PCI and PCI only. PCI is little If read*()/write*() are designed for PCI access only as you claimed, that explains why they call in/out_leXX() funcitons. The problem is that read*()/write*() are misused in some places, e.g., serial drivers such as serial8250. The serial_in() and serial_out() call read*() and write*() respectively. So what's your recommendation in such a case? Regards, -Shawn.