Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964859Ab3FSSwc (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:52:32 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.186]:58288 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964807Ab3FSSwa (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:52:30 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann To: David Daney Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] tty/8250_dw: Add support for OCTEON UARTS. Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:52:09 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/3.8.0-22-generic; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: David Daney , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, ralf@linux-mips.org, Jamie Iles , "Greg Kroah-Hartman" , Jiri Slaby , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Daney References: <1371582775-12141-1-git-send-email-ddaney.cavm@gmail.com> <2302882.NVjP8DdXWY@wuerfel> <51C1E028.2040700@caviumnetworks.com> In-Reply-To: <51C1E028.2040700@caviumnetworks.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201306192052.09575.arnd@arndb.de> X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:ZbYxcUpUyS76u1/rRQTN2kLUR9D28x30SfPTuHYQJER WAFUaIwoHq3z+luwzRdlpp7McZt5/snat/+Nntz4UUqTlUBT8F ovyG2KZm46NCfQeflT6Bq8fFCtUafbK/VOf8SeApbhTeOIgkBK lb7gyNWg20jZSqA06ji8eXWzRPhRDbCqyEXq+npMqI6MfmJy4H 9vHmMBFpFQPQDQBGEob+y9wwQQE98q8m3NbiXXVkrZFVJGszWk ARX7qQt8QV8Ido5qrlh5Na+Pxi9SaJnrLWM8hj4WsVh5VCTF8s WnwtkBPBtxQ+TREcDmn1fKVk6wqabG2T7MNRxHyFmoVg8XdLhw dXINtU6n9qW41CcX9DQk= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1062 Lines: 26 On Wednesday 19 June 2013, David Daney wrote: > On 06/19/2013 03:01 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > It's also wrong to use the > > __raw_* variant, which is not guaranteed to be atomic and is not > > endian-safe. > > We do runtime probing and only use this function on platforms where it > is appropriate, so atomicity is not an issue. As for endianess, I used > the __raw_ variant precisely because it is correct for both big and > little endian kernels. You don't know what the compiler turns a __raw_writeq into, it could always to eight byte wise stores, that's why typically writeq is an inline assembly while __raw_writeq is just a pointer dereference. __raw_* never do endian swaps, so it will be wrong on either big-endian CPUs or on little-endian CPUs, depending on what the MMIO register needs. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/