From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964870AbWALEOK (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:14:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751393AbWALEOK (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:14:10 -0500 Received: from mx.pathscale.com ([64.160.42.68]:64489 "EHLO mx.pathscale.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751377AbWALEOJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:14:09 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2 of 2] __raw_memcpy_toio32 for x86_64 From: "Bryan O'Sullivan" To: Andi Kleen Cc: akpm@osdl.org, rdreier@cisco.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200601120233.51601.ak@suse.de> References: <200601120156.11529.ak@suse.de> <1137029233.17705.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200601120233.51601.ak@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 20:14:02 -0800 Message-Id: <1137039242.29795.5.camel@camp4.serpentine.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 02:33 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > I think it's deeply wrong to reuse names of standard functions with different > arguments. Either pass bytes or give it some other name. Someone (Matt Mackall?) suggested naming it __iowrite32_copy, by analogy with the stuff in asm-generic/iomap.h, I presume. Would that suit you? > That sounds like a very chipset specific assumption. Is that safe > to make? I can fix the doc so that it says "at least 32 bits", in that case. This should make the assumption more clear for other bus types.