Re: ia64 implementation of lib/iomap.c

From: Grant Grundler <iod00d_at_hp.com>
Date: 2004-10-27 04:12:58
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 10:49:07AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> What about the relaxed read then?  Should we have ioread_relaxed?
> I thought we had agreed that it was easier to assume relaxed semantics
> for ioread and add a dma_sync interface.

I would expect that requires fixing PCI drivers that depend on it.
Adding a dma_sync interface would probably make it easier to support
non-coherent (DMA and CPU caches are not coherent) platforms.

> Since PCI-X and PCI-Express have optional relaxed semantics that
> might make sense...

Jesse, you keep mixing up PCI-X Relaxed Ordering with readX() interface
and the two are NOT (directly) related.
The device driver can enable PCI-X Relaxed Ordering hints in general.
But the IO device controls "RO" hint use on individual bus transactions
it masters.

I'm not sure about PCI-Express (whole new bus protocol).

grant
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Tue Oct 26 14:19:23 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:32 EST