On 22-06-16, 12:36, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:33:03 AM CEST Ben Dooks wrote: > >> The use of __raw IO accesors is not endian safe and should be used > >> sparingly. The relaxed variants should be as lightweight and also > >> are endian safe. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > > > > Why not use the normal readl/writel() here instead of the relaxed version? > > > > Either one should work here, but in general I'd recommend using the > > non-relaxed version unless code is particularly performance sensitive. > > > > The main argument for that is to not let people get used to using > > _relaxed() all the time because it causes some very hard to debug > > problems in the cases where you actually need the barriers. > > I think that would be actually different patch, not endian related. > The concurrent operations here are excluded by mutexes so this looks > safe. > > Viresh, > I saw your ack. Do you prefer me to take the set through samsung-soc? Sure. -- viresh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |