From: Logan Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] alpha: provide ioread64 and iowrite64 implementations Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:09:55 -0600 Message-ID: <401cdb64-6fdb-be30-b8bc-bf51c1a35074@deltatee.com> References: <20170622164817.25515-1-logang@deltatee.com> <20170622164817.25515-5-logang@deltatee.com> <20170622210828.27304f6a@alans-desktop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-ntb@googlegroups.com, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Arnd Bergmann , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Stephen Bates , Richard Henderson , Ivan Kokshaysky , Matt Turner To: Alan Cox Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170622210828.27304f6a@alans-desktop> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org On 6/22/2017 2:08 PM, Alan Cox wrote: > But this does not do the same thing as an ioread64 with regards to > atomicity or side effects on the device. The same is true of the other > hacks. You either have a real 64bit single read/write from MMIO space or > you don't. You can't fake it. Yes, I know. But is it not better than having every driver that wants to use these functions fake it themselves? Logan