Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 22 Oct 2014 18:22:09 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] ARM: supplementing IO accessors with 64 bit capability | From | Mathieu Poirier <> |
| |
On 22 October 2014 18:11, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:06:23AM -0600, mathieu.poirier@linaro.org wrote: >> @@ -306,10 +324,13 @@ extern void _memset_io(volatile void __iomem *, int, size_t); >> __raw_readw(c)); __r; }) >> #define readl_relaxed(c) ({ u32 __r = le32_to_cpu((__force __le32) \ >> __raw_readl(c)); __r; }) >> +#define readq_relaxed(c) ({ u64 __r = le64_to_cpu((__force __le64) \ >> + __raw_readq(c)); __r; }) >> >> #define writeb_relaxed(v,c) __raw_writeb(v,c) >> #define writew_relaxed(v,c) __raw_writew((__force u16) cpu_to_le16(v),c) >> #define writel_relaxed(v,c) __raw_writel((__force u32) cpu_to_le32(v),c) >> +#define writeq_relaxed(v,c) __raw_writeq((__force u64) cpu_to_le64(v),c) > > You should only define these if we have the corresponding __raw_ versions > too.
I had this conversation with a colleague who reviewed the work. If the architecture is < 5 the __raw_ versions aren't included and the compiler won't complain until someone tries to use the macros. We achieve the same result - the macros aren't accessible when the architecture doesn't support it - while saving an #if condition in the file.
I'm not strongly opinionated on this - I can enclose the macros in an #if statement.
> > -- > FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up > according to speedtest.net.
|  |