On 10/05/11 18:27, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 10 May 2011, Jan Andersson wrote:
>
>>> Shouldn't these things already be defined in an arch-specific header
>>> file? Just like readl(), __raw_readl(), ... ?
>>>
>>
>> If there is call to make a big endian access that works on all
>> architectures that would be a better choice.
>>
>> I could have used __raw_readl() directly but I didn't since the above is
>> what is done in ehci.h. IMHO it makes sense to have it like this because
>> (again assuming that read/write() always is defined to work with LE
>> memory) a read/write*_be is what we need to do and then people can
>> define the appropriate function/macro for their arch here locally.
>>
>> (It is possible that I have missed or misunderstood how these io
>> routines are intended work, to me it seems like much has been based on
>> the assumption that I/O will always be connected over PCI or some other
>> LE bus).
>>
>> I propose that the current solution is kept. If that is not acceptable I
>> suggest that the calls are changed to use the __raw versions of
>> read/write (but that could break in case the __raw versions are defined
>> to be native endian and someone wants to use a BE controller together
>> with a LE processor).
>
> Yes, keeping the current solution is easiest. But the whole situation
> is a mess; some architectures define readl_be() and others don't. It
> needs to be solved at a higher level.
>
I agree. I will send V3 of this series with fixes for all other comments
now. Then I try to add {read,write}*_be for this architecture. When/if
that patch accepted I will follow up with patches to remove the
LEON_SPARC-specific fixes for read/write in ehci.h and uhci-hcd.h
(assuming that V3 is accepted).
Best regards,
Jan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
