Re: HELP: Is writeq an atomic operation??

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <rdreier@...>
Cc: <Eric.Moore@...>, <linux-scsi@...>, <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Friday, May 2, 2008 - 6:49 pm

From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 15:43:32 -0700


Right, I guess there aren't, but what drivers do currently is roll
their own 64-bit MMIO for such cases.

I noticed this when writing drivers/net/niu.c

I suppose this is on purpose, so the driver can setup any
such protection and handling, as needed.
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: HELP: Is writeq an atomic operation??, David Miller, (Fri May 2, 6:32 pm)
Re: HELP: Is writeq an atomic operation??, Roland Dreier, (Fri May 2, 6:43 pm)
RE: HELP: Is writeq an atomic operation??, Moore, Eric, (Fri May 2, 6:49 pm)
Re: HELP: Is writeq an atomic operation??, Roland Dreier, (Fri May 2, 6:53 pm)
RE: HELP: Is writeq an atomic operation??, Moore, Eric, (Fri May 2, 7:13 pm)
Re: HELP: Is writeq an atomic operation??, Roland Dreier, (Fri May 2, 7:21 pm)
RE: HELP: Is writeq an atomic operation??, Moore, Eric, (Fri May 2, 7:31 pm)
Re: HELP: Is writeq an atomic operation??, David Miller, (Fri May 2, 6:49 pm)