On Tuesday 17 of December 2013 13:45:06 Thierry Reding wrote: > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 01:00:10PM +0100, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > On Tuesday 17 of December 2013 11:51:36 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:10:22PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 04:57:04PM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote: > > > > > +static inline u32 fsl_pwm_readl(struct fsl_pwm_chip *fpc, > > > > > + const void __iomem *addr) > > > > > +{ > > > > > + u32 val; > > > > > + > > > > > + val = __raw_readl(addr); > > > > > + > > > > > + if (likely(fpc->big_endian)) > > > > > > > > The likely() probably isn't very useful in this case. But if you want to > > > > keep it, it should at least be reversed, since little-endian is actually > > > > the default (you have to specify the big-endian property to activate the > > > > big endian mode). > > > > > > > > > + val = be32_to_cpu(val); > > > > > + else > > > > > + val = le32_to_cpu(val); > > > > > > This will also cause sparse errors, because when sparse is enabled, these > > > expect __le32 or __be32 arguments, not u32. > > > > My question is why can't you just create two sets of accessors, one big > > endian and one little endian, add two function pointers to your > > fsl_pwm_chip struct and let the driver set the to correct accessors in > > probe? > > I guess that would be one possibility. > > > This would eliminate the problem with types Russell mentioned and IMHO > > make the code cleaner. > > I fail to see how that would eliminate the problem with the types. That > said I don't actually see sparse complaining about any type mismatches. > That's probably because the various macros implicitly cast to u32. Well, in BE variant you would read the register using __raw_readl() into a __be32 and then get an u32 from be32_to_cpu() and return it. Similarly for writes In LE variant, readl()/writel() could be used directly. > > > > > > + rmb(); > > > > > > > > I'd prefer the rmb() to follow the __raw_readl() immediately to make the > > > > relationship more explicit. > > > > > > A better question to ask is: why is this barrier here? What memory > > > ordering operations is it trying to serialise? > > > > I'd also add a question why __raw accessors are used here. > > Because both readl() and writel() explicitly perform little endian > accesses. Right. Thanks for pointing this out. Best regards, Tomasz -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html