On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:16:20PM +0000, Ralf Baechle wrote: > On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 11:26:46AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > Perhaps it would be better to have a CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_READQ and to then > > disable these drivers on the architectures which don't provide > > readq/writeq support. > > And we also need to define the exact semantics. Questions coming to mind: > > o are implementations performing 2 32-bit accesses acceptable? > o if so, what ordering for the two accesses is acceptable? and don't forget to document the semantics. If we're going to end up with CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_READQ which architectures can select, I suggest putting it in the help for that symbol. Why not another random file in Documentation/ ? Because it's a random file in Documentation/ that'll be overlooked when someone decided to select ARCH_HAS_READQ. If it's along side the relevent config option, there is a higher chance it will be noticed. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: -- 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
