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 majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
