On Thu, 2012-02-23 at 11:29 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> What's this stuff doing in generic drivers?
Well, I suppose that's because the xilinx stuff used to be ppc
only ? :-)
> See drivers/gpio/gpio-xilinx.c:
> static int xgpio_get(struct gpio_chip *gc, unsigned int gpio)
> {
> struct of_mm_gpio_chip *mm_gc = to_of_mm_gpio_chip(gc);
>
> return (in_be32(mm_gc->regs + XGPIO_DATA_OFFSET) >> gpio) & 1;
> }
>
> include/linux/of_gpio.h:
> struct of_mm_gpio_chip {
> struct gpio_chip gc;
> void (*save_regs)(struct of_mm_gpio_chip *mm_gc);
> void __iomem *regs;
> };
>
> Why am I being asked to add in_be32() etc to ARMs io.h ? Why do we need
> yet another set of IO accessors? Is there something wrong with
> ioread*()/ioread*be() etc?
Nope, nothing wrong with them, the driver should be fixed. in_be* is
historical ppc stuff.
> My guess is this stems from a lack of proper review
That or history. Our readX/writeX used to be more PCI specific (have
infrastructure to work around PCI bridge bugs) which some drivers
avoided using the in_/out_ variants, in some case it's just pure
history, etc... Some of these things are ancient.
Cheers,
Ben.
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
