RE: [PATCH v4] Kconfig: introduce HAS_IOPORT option and select it as necessary

From: Linuxppc-dev Arnd Bergmann
> Sent: 05 April 2023 21:32
> 
> On Wed, Apr 5, 2023, at 22:00, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > On April 5, 2023 8:12:38 AM PDT, Niklas Schnelle <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>On Thu, 2023-03-23 at 17:33 +0100, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
> >>> We introduce a new HAS_IOPORT Kconfig option to indicate support for I/O
> >>> Port access. In a future patch HAS_IOPORT=n will disable compilation of
> >>> the I/O accessor functions inb()/outb() and friends on architectures
> >>> which can not meaningfully support legacy I/O spaces such as s390.
> >>> >>
> >>Gentle ping. As far as I can tell this hasn't been picked to any tree
> >>sp far but also hasn't seen complains so I'm wondering if I should send
> >>a new version of the combined series of this patch plus the added
> >>HAS_IOPORT dependencies per subsystem or wait until this is picked up.
> >
> > You need this on a system supporting not just ISA but also PCI.
> >
> > Typically on non-x86 architectures this is simply mapped into a memory window.
> 
> I'm pretty confident that the list is correct here, as the HAS_IOPORT
> symbol is enabled exactly for the architectures that have a way to
> map the I/O space. PCIe generally works fine without I/O space, the
> only exception are drivers for devices that were around as early PCI.

Isn't there a difference between cpu that have inb()/outb() (probably
only x86?) and architectures (well computer designs) that can generate
PCI 'I/O' cycles by some means.
It isn't even just PCI I/O cycles, I've used an ARM cpu (SA1100)
that mapped a chuck of physical address space onto PCMCIA I/O cycles.

If the hardware can map a PCI 'IO' bar into normal kernel address
space then the bar and accesses can be treated exactly like a memory bar.
This probably leaves x86 as the outlier where you need (IIRC) io_readl()
and friends that can generate in/out instructions for those accesses.

There are also all the x86 ISA devices which need in/out instructions.
But (with the likely exception of the UART) they are pretty much
platform specific.

So, to my mind at least, HAS_IOPORT is just the wrong question.

	David