Scott Wood wrote:
>>> It doesn't buy us anything in here, but it's conceivable that someone
>>> may want to write a driver that uses a shift in the I/O accessor
>>> rather than an array of port offsets,
>> It wouldn't be IDE driver then, and neither it would be libata
>> which also does this another way this (despite pata_platform uses
>> shifts too -- not in the accessors, so no speed loss).
> The device tree is not just for Linux.
Yeah, and I can't wait to see some other its users. ;-)
This doesn't mean that shift is better anyway. If everyone considers it
better, I give up. But be warned that shift (stride) is not the only property
characterizing register accesses -- the regs might be only accessible as
16/32-bit quantities, for example (16-bit is a real world example -- from
Amiga or smth of that sort, IIRC).
>>> equivalent of the cntlzw innstruction, and shift makes it clear that
>>> the stride must be power-of-two). Plus, using shift is consistent
>>> with what we do on ns16550.
>> Why the heck should we care about the UART code taling about IDE?!
> Consistency?
We're not obliged to be consistent with every piece of the kernel code.
> -Scott
MBR, Sergei
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
