On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 01:04:44PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 12:53:47 -0700 > Roland Dreier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, I agree that's a good plan, especially the documentation part. > > However I would argue that what's in > > drivers/infiniband/hw/mthca/mthca_doorbell.h > > is legitimate: the driver uses __raw_writeq() when it exists and uses > > two __raw_writel()s properly serialized with a device-specific lock to > > get exactly the atomicity it needs on 32-bit archs. > > No, driver-specific workarounds are not legitimate, sorry. > > The driver should simply fail to compile on architectures which do not > implement __raw_writeq().
So, what you're basically saying is that on architectures which can _NOT_ implement an atomic __raw_writeq(), certain drivers simply will not be available? > We can speed up the process by sending helpful emails to architecture > maintainers, but they'll notice either way. I think you're completely wrong in the context of the message you're replying to - it's talking about an _atomic_ 64-bit write. Sure, if you want a _non-atomic_ 64-bit write then that's possible, but many 32-bit architectures can't do a 64-bit atomic IO write and that isn't something they can "fix". -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
