Re: arch/x86/Kconfig selects invalid HAVE_READQ, HAVE_WRITEQ vars

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Hitoshi Mitake <h.mitake@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 01:03, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> >
> > * Hitoshi Mitake <h.mitake@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 19:53, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > * H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Roland Dreier wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Notice that it reads from addr+4 *before* it reads from addr, rather
> >> >> > than after as in your example (and in fact your example depends on
> >> >> > undefined compiler semantics, since there is no sequence point between
> >> >> > the two operands of the | operator).  Now, I don't know that hardware,
> >> >> > so I don't know if it makes a difference, but the niu example I gave in
> >> >> > my original email shows that given hardware with clear-on-read
> >> >> > registers, the order does very much matter.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> At least for x86, the order should be low-high, because that is the
> >> >> order that those two transactions would be seen on a 32-bit bus
> >> >> downstream from the CPU if the CPU issued a 64-bit transaction.
> >> >>
> >> >> The only sane way to handle this as something other than per-driver
> >> >> hacks would be something like:
> >> >>
> >> >> #include <linux/io64.h>               /* Any 64-bit I/O OK */
> >> >>
> >> >> #include <linux/io64lh.h>     /* Low-high splitting OK */
> >> >>
> >> >> #include <linux/io64hl.h>     /* High-low splitting OK */
> >> >>
> >> >> #include <linux/io64atomic.h> /* 64-bit I/O must be atomic */
> >> >>
> >> >> ... i.e. letting the driver choose what fallback method it will accept.
> >> >
> >> > Yeah - with the default being the natural low-high order.
> >> >
> >> > The other argument is that if a driver really wants some rare, oddly
> >> > different order it should better define its own method that is not
> >> > named in the same (or in a similar) way as an existing generic API.
> >> > Otherwise, confusion will ensue.
> >> I think this is a good way.
> >> readq/writeq are already in Linus's tree, removing these is not a good idea.
> >>
> >> And I've sent the patch to fix a little problem of Kconfig about
> >> readq/writeq to you.
> >> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123521109218008&w=2
> >> Did you notice?
> >>
> >> Adding cautions about accessing order or non-atomic to Kconfig's help
> >> part may be benefit.
> >
> > It's better to add add such non-interactive help text as Makefile
> > comments:
> >
> > #
> > # This option ...
> > #
> >
> > and they should be invisible in make menuconfig. This is a facility
> > provided by architectures.
> I'll move the help text from Kconfig to Makefile.
> (My original patch also doesn't make help text visible in make menuconfig.)

sorry i meant the Kconfig file - you can put comments in there too. 
help text is really meant for things that are interactive.

	Ingo