Re: MMIO and gcc re-ordering issue

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Fri, 30 May 2008, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> Maybe we need another interface that does not do byteswapping but
> provides stronger ordering guarantees?

The byte swapping depends on the device/bus.

So what happened to the old idea of putting the accessor function pointers
in the device/bus structure?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
							    -- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/