> Yeah, I forgot I have a #ifndef writeq, then defined the x86_64 version > of that. I've not tested on x86, so I'm not sure whether it works. > How are you handling writeq when its not defined, as the case in x86? Write two writel() inside a spinlock to avoid any transactions in the middle (the HW I'm dealing with can deal with two 32-bit transactions, as long as nothing comes in the middle). If your hardware demands a single 64-bit transaction, you may be in trouble, because I'm not sure all 32-bit systems can generate such a PCIe transaction. You can see include/linux/mlx4/doorbell.h for exactly what I did. - R. --
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 004/196] Chinese: add translation of SubmittingPatches |
| Alan Stern | Re: 2.6.22-rc2-mm1 |
| Satyam Sharma | Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures |
| William Lee Irwin III | Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS] |
git: | |
| Dale Farnsworth | Re: [PATCH 03/39] mv643xx_eth: shorten reg names |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: HTB accuracy for high speed |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 15/37] dccp: Set per-connection CCIDs via socket options |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
