Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753362AbYJANxf (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2008 09:53:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752675AbYJANxX (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2008 09:53:23 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:60718 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752541AbYJANxV (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2008 09:53:21 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 06:53:05 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven To: Kyle McMartin Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Kyle McMartin , Grant Grundler , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci: introduce users of ioremap_pcibar() Message-ID: <20081001065305.647715b3@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20081001130717.GE10632@phobos.i.cabal.ca> References: <20080926163641.288bf868@infradead.org> <20080926163718.32f0867e@infradead.org> <20080929072643.GA28871@colo.lackof.org> <20080929064220.374c68a4@infradead.org> <20080929171049.GA14409@colo.lackof.org> <20080929102325.0ca5c0c9@infradead.org> <20081001052450.GB7348@colo.lackof.org> <20080930153001.1107c0de@infradead.org> <20081001124254.GD10632@phobos.i.cabal.ca> <20081001125711.GG13822@parisc-linux.org> <20081001130717.GE10632@phobos.i.cabal.ca> Organization: Intel X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.12.12; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by casper.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1255 Lines: 32 On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 09:07:17 -0400 Kyle McMartin wrote: > > > > OK, not all architectures use the generic code, but I've been > > through and they all do more or less the above (mn10300 and frv > > just return the address, but their readl() and inl() are identical) > > > > I don't recall anyone ever promising that the iomap interfaces would > be usable with legacy accessors. I'd certainly prefer it if we > didn't, as well, as it makes for more explicitly written drivers... > > Just because you can use them, doesn't mean you should. > ok so now we're full circle. I started with a real ioremap, was told "no must use iomap" despite the same argument you make, and now we're back to square one. What I want is an interface that can replace ioremap() for the common "I want the bar uncached" case. Nothing more nothing less.... sigh. -- Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org -- 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/