Re: [PATCH 1/1] edac x38: new MC driver module

[Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>]

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:16:20PM +0000, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 11:26:46AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> 
> > Perhaps it would be better to have a CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_READQ and to then
> > disable these drivers on the architectures which don't provide
> > readq/writeq support.
> 
> And we also need to define the exact semantics.  Questions coming to mind:
> 
>   o are implementations performing 2 32-bit accesses acceptable?
>   o if so, what ordering for the two accesses is acceptable?

and don't forget to document the semantics.  If we're going to end up
with CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_READQ which architectures can select, I suggest
putting it in the help for that symbol.  Why not another random file
in Documentation/ ?  Because it's a random file in Documentation/
that'll be overlooked when someone decided to select ARCH_HAS_READQ.
If it's along side the relevent config option, there is a higher
chance it will be noticed.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of: