This will allow us to include sys/io.h and use libc's in/out when
available.
Also see http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2009-October/002853.html
Signed-off-by: Matt Turner
---
hw/xfree86/common/compiler.h| 201 ---
hw/xfree86/common/xf86Helper.c
Excerpts from Matt Turner's message of Sun Nov 01 11:01:20 -0800 2009:
> This will allow us to include sys/io.h and use libc's in/out when
> available.
That's a fine goal, but given the ambiguity between Linux and BSD on
the outb argument ordering, I've got some suggestions
> #ifdef linux
>
> From: Matt Turner
> Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 14:01:20 -0500
>
> This will allow us to include sys/io.h and use libc's in/out when
> available.
While I sympathise with your attempt to clean up the mess in
compiler.h, this will break at least one driver (xf86-video-i128).
_
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>> From: Matt Turner
>> Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 14:01:20 -0500
>>
>> This will allow us to include sys/io.h and use libc's in/out when
>> available.
>
> While I sympathise with your attempt to clean up the mess in
> compiler.h, this will break a
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 3:29 PM, keithp wrote:
> Excerpts from Matt Turner's message of Sun Nov 01 11:01:20 -0800 2009:
>> This will allow us to include sys/io.h and use libc's in/out when
>> available.
>
> That's a fine goal, but given the ambiguity between Linux and BSD on
> the outb argument ord
Excerpts from Mark Kettenis's message of Sun Nov 01 13:19:04 -0800 2009:
> While I sympathise with your attempt to clean up the mess in
> compiler.h, this will break at least one driver (xf86-video-i128).
A fine example of why we want to merge the drivers into the server :-)
In any case, for now
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 6:13 PM, keithp wrote:
> Excerpts from Mark Kettenis's message of Sun Nov 01 13:19:04 -0800 2009:
>
>> While I sympathise with your attempt to clean up the mess in
>> compiler.h, this will break at least one driver (xf86-video-i128).
>
> A fine example of why we want to merg
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 18:22 -0500, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 6:13 PM, keithp wrote:
> > Excerpts from Mark Kettenis's message of Sun Nov 01 13:19:04 -0800 2009:
> >
> >> While I sympathise with your attempt to clean up the mess in
> >> compiler.h, this will break at least one dri