David Mosberger-Tang wrote:
Why do not "readb()" ... "writeb()" include "mf.a"-s?Again, acceptance is not normally needed by readX/writeX and mf.a is extremely expensive (on the order of 1,000 cycles). If you want ordering, you need to use explicit barriers (or rely on the effect of "volatile" in ia64-specific code).
Assuming a device driver uses memory mapped I/O, what is the architecture independent way to make sure that the I/O reads - writes are accepted ? (I cannot use "__ia64_mf_a()".) What is the difference between "readb_relaxed()" and "readb()"? Were not they defined to provide both strict and weak (relaxed) I/O ordering? Thanks, Zoltan - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|