Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sat, 20 Aug 2022 23:57:29 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, hch@infradead.org,
        agordeev@linux.ibm.com, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/11] mm: ioremap: allow ARCH to have its own ioremap
 definition
Message-ID: <YwHXWdycBZr+bluG@infradead.org>
References: <20220820003125.353570-1-bhe@redhat.com>
 <20220820003125.353570-4-bhe@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220820003125.353570-4-bhe@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 08:31:17AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> Architectures like xtensa, arc, can be converted to GENERIC_IOREMAP,
> to take standard ioremap_prot() and ioremap_xxx() way. But they have
> ARCH specific handling for ioremap() method, than standard ioremap()
> method.

Do they?

For arc, the arc_uncached_addr_space case can be easily handled by
arch_ioremap, and the xtensa case looks very similar to that.

I'd really like to kill off arch definitions of ioremap going
forward, as they should just be a special case of ioremap_prot
by definition.