From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262065AbUEWBPy (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 May 2004 21:15:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262071AbUEWBPy (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 May 2004 21:15:54 -0400 Received: from umhlanga.stratnet.net ([12.162.17.40]:15047 "EHLO umhlanga.STRATNET.NET") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262065AbUEWBPx (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 May 2004 21:15:53 -0400 To: Andrew Morton Cc: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.6-mm5 References: <20040522013636.61efef73.akpm@osdl.org> <20040522180837.3d3cc8a9.akpm@osdl.org> X-Message-Flag: Warning: May contain useful information From: Roland Dreier Date: 22 May 2004 18:15:51 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20040522180837.3d3cc8a9.akpm@osdl.org> Message-ID: <527jv4ymd4.fsf@topspin.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 May 2004 01:15:51.0670 (UTC) FILETIME=[7D05F960:01C44063] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew> I don't think we can expect all architectures to be able Andrew> to implement atomic 64-bit IO's, can we? Andrew> ergo, drivers which want to use readq and writeq should Andrew> provide the appropriate locking. Perhaps we should have ARCH_HAS_ATOMIC_WRITEQ or something so that drivers don't add the overhead of locking on architectures where it's not necessary? (I happen to be working on a driver that needs atomic 64-bit writes, and where those writes happen to be in the fast path) Thanks, Roland