| Message ID | 1223889009-31336-1-git-send-email-cooloney@kernel.org |
|---|---|
| State | Rejected, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 05:10:09PM +0800, Bryan Wu wrote: > From: Javier Herrero <jherrero@hvsistemas.es> No, your arch definitions of writesb and co are wrong if they are not taking 'void __iomem *' arguments. > Signed-off-by: Javier Herrero <jherrero@hvsistemas.es> > Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu <cooloney@kernel.org> > --- > drivers/net/dm9000.c | 12 ++++++------ > 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/dm9000.c b/drivers/net/dm9000.c > index f42c23f..c4737ca 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/dm9000.c > +++ b/drivers/net/dm9000.c > @@ -188,35 +188,35 @@ iow(board_info_t * db, int reg, int value) > > static void dm9000_outblk_8bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) > { > - writesb(reg, data, count); > + writesb((int)reg, data, count); > } > > static void dm9000_outblk_16bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) > { > - writesw(reg, data, (count+1) >> 1); > + writesw((int)reg, data, (count+1) >> 1); > } > > static void dm9000_outblk_32bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) > { > - writesl(reg, data, (count+3) >> 2); > + writesl((int)reg, data, (count+3) >> 2); > } > > /* input block from chip to memory */ > > static void dm9000_inblk_8bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) > { > - readsb(reg, data, count); > + readsb((int)reg, data, count); > } > > > static void dm9000_inblk_16bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) > { > - readsw(reg, data, (count+1) >> 1); > + readsw((int)reg, data, (count+1) >> 1); > } > > static void dm9000_inblk_32bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) > { > - readsl(reg, data, (count+3) >> 2); > + readsl((int)reg, data, (count+3) >> 2); > } > > /* dump block from chip to null */ > -- > 1.5.6
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 05:10:09PM +0800, Bryan Wu wrote: >> From: Javier Herrero <jherrero@hvsistemas.es> > > No, your arch definitions of writesb and co are wrong if they > are not taking 'void __iomem *' arguments. > Right, we should check the I/O functions and make them support "void __iomem *" arguments. Thanks -Bryan >> Signed-off-by: Javier Herrero <jherrero@hvsistemas.es> >> Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu <cooloney@kernel.org> >> --- >> drivers/net/dm9000.c | 12 ++++++------ >> 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/dm9000.c b/drivers/net/dm9000.c >> index f42c23f..c4737ca 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/dm9000.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/dm9000.c >> @@ -188,35 +188,35 @@ iow(board_info_t * db, int reg, int value) >> >> static void dm9000_outblk_8bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) >> { >> - writesb(reg, data, count); >> + writesb((int)reg, data, count); >> } >> >> static void dm9000_outblk_16bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) >> { >> - writesw(reg, data, (count+1) >> 1); >> + writesw((int)reg, data, (count+1) >> 1); >> } >> >> static void dm9000_outblk_32bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) >> { >> - writesl(reg, data, (count+3) >> 2); >> + writesl((int)reg, data, (count+3) >> 2); >> } >> >> /* input block from chip to memory */ >> >> static void dm9000_inblk_8bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) >> { >> - readsb(reg, data, count); >> + readsb((int)reg, data, count); >> } >> >> >> static void dm9000_inblk_16bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) >> { >> - readsw(reg, data, (count+1) >> 1); >> + readsw((int)reg, data, (count+1) >> 1); >> } >> >> static void dm9000_inblk_32bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) >> { >> - readsl(reg, data, (count+3) >> 2); >> + readsl((int)reg, data, (count+3) >> 2); >> } >> >> /* dump block from chip to null */ >> -- >> 1.5.6 > > -- > -- > Ben > > Q: What's a light-year? > A: One-third less calories than a regular year. > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Bryan Wu <cooloney@kernel.org> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:10:09 +0800 > From: Javier Herrero <jherrero@hvsistemas.es> > > Signed-off-by: Javier Herrero <jherrero@hvsistemas.es> > Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu <cooloney@kernel.org> This is not only inelegant, it'll likely break things on 64-bit MIPS or any other case where the upper 32-bit matter. I'd rather see Blackfin fix it's I/O accessor prototypes to take a proper __iomem pointer. This patch won't be applied. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 05:52, Bryan Wu wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Javier Herrero wrote: >> So it seems that we must correct that in other place? > > Yes, we need to check the I/O read_write functions. and drop the CONFIG_BLACKFIN hacks in the dm90000 driver ... we rewrite the write* functions to out* ... probably because we dont provide any write* functions in our headers -mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 6:24 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 05:52, Bryan Wu wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Javier Herrero wrote: >>> So it seems that we must correct that in other place? >> >> Yes, we need to check the I/O read_write functions. > > and drop the CONFIG_BLACKFIN hacks in the dm90000 driver ... we > rewrite the write* functions to out* ... probably because we dont > provide any write* functions in our headers > -mike > No problem, I will take care of that. -Bryan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 03:01:50AM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Bryan Wu <cooloney@kernel.org> > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:10:09 +0800 > > > From: Javier Herrero <jherrero@hvsistemas.es> > > > > Signed-off-by: Javier Herrero <jherrero@hvsistemas.es> > > Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu <cooloney@kernel.org> > > This is not only inelegant, it'll likely break things on > 64-bit MIPS or any other case where the upper 32-bit matter. > > I'd rather see Blackfin fix it's I/O accessor prototypes > to take a proper __iomem pointer. How much would it hurt to provide blackfin wide readsb and friends with the correct prototype and remove the nasty blackfin hack in the dm9000.c driver for good?
diff --git a/drivers/net/dm9000.c b/drivers/net/dm9000.c index f42c23f..c4737ca 100644 --- a/drivers/net/dm9000.c +++ b/drivers/net/dm9000.c @@ -188,35 +188,35 @@ iow(board_info_t * db, int reg, int value) static void dm9000_outblk_8bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) { - writesb(reg, data, count); + writesb((int)reg, data, count); } static void dm9000_outblk_16bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) { - writesw(reg, data, (count+1) >> 1); + writesw((int)reg, data, (count+1) >> 1); } static void dm9000_outblk_32bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) { - writesl(reg, data, (count+3) >> 2); + writesl((int)reg, data, (count+3) >> 2); } /* input block from chip to memory */ static void dm9000_inblk_8bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) { - readsb(reg, data, count); + readsb((int)reg, data, count); } static void dm9000_inblk_16bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) { - readsw(reg, data, (count+1) >> 1); + readsw((int)reg, data, (count+1) >> 1); } static void dm9000_inblk_32bit(void __iomem *reg, void *data, int count) { - readsl(reg, data, (count+3) >> 2); + readsl((int)reg, data, (count+3) >> 2); } /* dump block from chip to null */