From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Cc: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
Ulrich Teichert <krypton@ulrich-teichert.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: Odd pci_iounmap() declaration rules..
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2021 17:44:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgzc8EUcH=V7P0GoxVYw4bQ7URJvQVZ7_5pODQmrSkAnw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wirqeqb59bbFjCQ9L9BiVOQFqD=JbUEG+hU2bF4BDWqVg@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 3:44 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> The fix seems to be to just move that odd code from the header file to
> lib/pci_iomap.c, and that should make it all JustWork(tm).
I'm not 100% happy about the end result, and in particular I think
that the new generic pci_iounmap() function for the
ARCH_WANTS_GENERIC_PCI_IOUNMAP case should do the "iounmap(p)" thing
even if ARCH_HAS_GENERIC_IOPORT_MAP wasn't true, but I tried to keep
the old rules, even if they seemed broken.
arm and arm64 build for me, as did sparc64 and alpha. At least in the
configs I tested.
And the code _does_ make a bit more sense than it used to. It still
has crazy corners, but moving the pci_iounmap() code out of the header
file should make it easier to fix up in the future.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-20 0:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAHk-=wjRrh98pZoQ+AzfWmsTZacWxTJKXZ9eKU2X_0+jM=O8nw@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <YUdti08rLzfDZy8S@ls3530>
[not found] ` <CAHk-=wgKc5TY-LiAjog5VKNUQ84CSZyPu+FQekMHDar=kdSW=Q@mail.gmail.com>
2021-09-19 21:28 ` Odd pci_iounmap() declaration rules Nathan Chancellor
2021-09-19 22:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-09-19 22:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-09-20 0:44 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2021-09-20 14:30 ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-09-20 15:31 ` Guenter Roeck
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAHk-=wgzc8EUcH=V7P0GoxVYw4bQ7URJvQVZ7_5pODQmrSkAnw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=krypton@ulrich-teichert.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).