On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 11:49 PM, Kanigeri, Hari<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Doyu-san,
>
> Regarding
>
>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=124201773423892&w=2
>> I think that the first one should be merged into d.o-z.org now, but
>> for the second one about 128 byte alignment. let me know your
>> thought/plan on it.
>
> -- I think you sent this patch as a probable fix for the slab corruption that 
> was observed in Bridge driver, but then we found that slab corruption was due 
> to some other issue in Bridge driver and not due to the cache alignment.
>
> Irrespective of above point, I think it is good to enforce the cache 
> alignment check, but I think the check should be in Proc Map function and to 
> start with the check should be under a flag so as not to affect some MM 
> applications that use padding to get over the alignment issue.

I agree, the check should be in proc map, and should be optional.
However, I would prefer it to be an all-or-nothing option, how about
in kconfig?

-- 
Felipe Contreras
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to