On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2001 at 11:29:06PM +0300, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru wrote:
> > No doubts it still has broken misaligned access.
>
> You're way out of line with that comment.
>
> Not necessarily Russell. You have even told us on several occaisions
> that the older ARMs simply cannot fix up unaligned loads/stores in
> fact.
Then the problem will have to be fixed elsewhere, maybe
by having the networking code do explicit unaligned
accesses through some macro which defaults to a normal
access on other systems ?
> Look, we're analyzing a problem and trying to explore every avenue for
> possible problems. If this were sparc64 I'd be checking my unaligned
> handler for bugs :-)
If sparc64 had this hardware problems, I'm sure we'd have
special hacks to handle the situation all throughout the
kernel already, instead of having such hacks blocked by
subsystem maintainers.
cheers,
Rik
-- DMCA, SSSCA, W3C? Who cares? http://thefreeworld.net/http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 23 2001 - 21:00:18 EST