linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] I/O helpers rework

To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] I/O helpers rework
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 19:44:08 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>, macro@mips.com, Richard Sandiford <rsandifo@redhat.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <20050217013406.GA14909@linux-mips.org>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0501131824350.21179@perivale.mips.com> <87k6qh2e6j.fsf@redhat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0501141956520.21179@perivale.mips.com> <20050122.015040.108744446.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <Pine.LNX.4.61L.0501211739410.16576@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20050217013406.GA14909@linux-mips.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Ralf Baechle wrote:

> >  Thanks for your insight -- your comments are not lost and I am working on 
> > taking them into account.  But meanwhile a confusion around the semantics 
> > of these operations arose (there is no documentation on them and some 
> > drivers expect some of these functions to swap, while others expect them 
> > not to) and changes were made to the tree that invalidated some of the 
> > fixes.  That needs to be addressed first and I expect another update to 
> > the file.  Here's a patch I'm going to start with.  Functions it adds have 
> > been named dma_* to indicate they are meant to preserve memory byte 
> > ordering.
> 
> Looks good but I don't really like the dma_* name prefix as these functions
> really have nothing to do with DMA - in fact they're the opposite.

 Well, the name is meant to imply DMA byte ordering is preserved.  If 
that's not clear enough (I don't insist it is), then I'd love to hear a 
reasonable proposal for an alternative.

  Maciej

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>