On Monday, September 26, 2011 11:44:22 AM Nick Thompson wrote:
On 26/09/11 10:32, Marek Vasut wrote:
On Monday, September 26, 2011 11:26:51 AM Nick Thompson wrote:
On 26/09/11 03:06, Marek Vasut wrote:
Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut marek.vasut@gmail.com
arch/arm/include/asm/io.h | 30 ++++++++++++++++++------------ 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h index 1fbc531..61f4987 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h @@ -78,43 +78,49 @@ static inline phys_addr_t virt_to_phys(void * vaddr)
extern inline void __raw_writesb(unsigned int addr, const void *data, int bytelen) {
uint8_t *buf = (uint8_t *)data;
- while(bytelen--)
__arch_putb(*buf++, addr);
- int i;
- for (i = 0; i < bytelen; i++)
__arch_putb(buf[i], addr);}
This fixes the problem in these use cases, but leaves the door open.
Would it be better to change the __arch_putb macro into an extern inline function instead which would catch these and future cases?
Yes, but you'll need to do that on a much larger scale. Is anyone up for doing it ?
I don't follow that. I found only three (identical) definitions in arm, sparc and sh. In those three cases __raw_writeb were also (identical) macro 'aliases' for __arch_putb.
Oh if it's only three arches then that's fine.
I guess you are referring to the testing required for all the boards in those three arches, or even just arm, with changes to all the (get|set)(b|w|l) cases? Maybe I see your point now...
Nick.