Re: [PATCH] NVMe: Fix compilation on architecturs withoutreadq/writeq

[Alan Cox]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:09:22 +0100
Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> * Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > >   u64 val;
> > >   val = readl(addr);
> > >   val |= readl(addr+4) << 32;
> > > 
> > > is well-defined and must read the low word first - both at the C level
> > > *and* at the CPU level. Anything else would be a bug in the
> > > architecture "readl()" implementation or the hardware.
> > 
> > That doesn't make the access atomic to hardware however as a true 64bit
> > readq/writeq would be ?
> > 
> > It seems to me the two are not quite the same semantically
> 
> Correct, and that's what the:
> 
> 	#include <asm/io-inatomic.h>
> 
> line in the driver would express.

Why would "inatomic" indicate that - I'm confused. It would imply to me
they were extra specially atomic ?  

(atomos if from the Greek so in- as a prefix isn't the same in- as in
many other words, welcome to English hell - who needs perl)

non-atomic.h might be better, or 'un-atomic' or 'multi-read' or
something ?

Alan
--
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/