> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-pci-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-pci- > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pratyush Anand > Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 4:11 AM > To: Bjorn Helgaas > Cc: Gabriele Paoloni; Jingoo Han; linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Wangzhou > (B); Yuanzhichang; Zhudacai; zhangjukuo; qiuzhenfa; Liguozhu (Kenneth) > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] PCI: designware: change dw_pcie_cfg_write() > and dw_pcie_cfg_read() > > On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 2:23 AM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > Is there really any value in keeping "addr" and "where" separate? > > Now we do not care of buggy SOCs which could have issues with non word > aligned address read. If there is any such SOC, then they can have > their own accessor. > So, I do not see any value of keeping "where". > > > dw_pcie_cfg_write() clearly doesn't care; it just adds them together. > I > > don't think dw_pcie_cfg_read() needs to care either: it could round > the > > address down to a 32-bit boundary and use the difference to compute > the > > mask and shift. > > > > So I'm proposing something like this: > > > > int dw_pcie_cfg_read(void __iomem *addr, int size, u32 *val) > > int dw_pcie_cfg_write(void __iomem *addr, int size, u32 val) Ok Agreed Will do in v4 Gab > > Agreed. > > ~Pratyush > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���"�)�� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
