Scott Wood <scottwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 10:11:02AM +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote: > > Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, 30 May 2008, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote: > > > > Maybe we need another interface that does not do byteswapping but > > > > provides stronger ordering guarantees? > > > > > > The byte swapping depends on the device/bus. > > > > Of course. But isn't it reasonable to assume that a device integrated > > on the same silicon as the CPU is connected to a somewhat sane bus > > which doesn't require any byte swapping? > > No, unfortunately. :-( Ok, I guess I was being naive. > See the end of drivers/dma/fsldma.h. Likewise with Freescale's PCI host > bridges; for some reason the bus itself being little endian led to the host > bridge control registers also being little endian. Right. But still, isn't it better to handle it on a case-by-case basis in the drivers? In some cases, it's best to explicitly use a certain byte order, in others it's best to use whatever is native to the CPU. Haavard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
