From: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kernFS/sysfs: mmap and vm_operations close
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:38:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2000464.hOpqYtiy7z@number-5> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170927074551.GA13742@kroah.com>
On Wednesday, 27 September 2017 09:45:51 CEST Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 08:41:12AM +0200, Federico Vaga wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 26 September 2017 23:31:29 CEST Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 05:50:55PM +0200, Federico Vaga wrote:
[...]
> > I want to make our VME interface "as PCI as possible", so I want to
> > re-create resources that users can `mmap` to access the device memory.
>
> Have you looked at the UIO interface?
Yes, but I do not see many differences (user prospective) in doing my mmap
with UIO, debugfs, sysfs, or char-device. I would have used a char-device, but
I wanted to offer a "PCI like" interface so I did as PCI does. Is the PCI
approach obsolete and it should not be taken as example?
I chose sysfs only for this reason, not because sysfs gives me something more;
actually it does not, and that's why we are here :D
> > This abstraction will allow us to write utilities that works on PCI and
> > VME
> > devices without dealing with the peculiarity of each interface. This is
> > particularly useful when you have FPGAs that can run the "same" code on
> > different buses, but it is true as well when you have the same hardware
> > (the same memory map) installed on VME cards or PCI cards.
> >
> > That's why a sysfs VME resource seems to me the easiest and clean way to
> > achieve this. I do not want to create yet another layer that hides the
> > differences between the two buses when mmap is so straight forward and
> > easy to implement. Another point is that adding a new layer add
> > complexity in the architecture and for the developers; they have to learn
> > yet another non- standard interface that I invent, while the concept of
> > resource is something that everybody know.
>
> Or if you use the VME kernel interface, everything will "just work"...
(in private explanation about why we cannot use the VME kernel)
> > > sysfs binary attributes are for dumping binary data that the kernel
> > > doesn't touch/parse, through to hardware. Why use mmap for this? Do
> > > you have a pointer to your code somewhere?
> >
> > No pointer :S
>
> Sorry, I can't help out much then.
>
> Best of luck!
No problem, thank you for your time.
--
Federico Vaga
http://www.federicovaga.it
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-27 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-26 15:50 kernFS/sysfs: mmap and vm_operations close Federico Vaga
2017-09-26 21:31 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-09-27 6:41 ` Federico Vaga
2017-09-27 7:45 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-09-27 9:38 ` Federico Vaga [this message]
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=2000464.hOpqYtiy7z@number-5 \
--to=federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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