On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
wrote:
> On 20 September 2017 at 13:35, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> The architectures that do use include/asm-generic/unaligned.h and
>> also set HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS in some configurations
>> are
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
wrote:
> On 20 September 2017 at 13:35, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> The architectures that do use include/asm-generic/unaligned.h and
>> also set HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS in some configurations
>> are arm, arm64, metag, s390 and arc.
>>
>>
On 20 September 2017 at 13:35, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
> wrote:
>> On 20 September 2017 at 08:18, Romain Izard
>> wrote:
>>> Add an arch-specific header to ARM, to retain other
On 20 September 2017 at 13:35, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
> wrote:
>> On 20 September 2017 at 08:18, Romain Izard
>> wrote:
>>> Add an arch-specific header to ARM, to retain other optimizations that
>>> rely on HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS, while
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
wrote:
> On 20 September 2017 at 08:18, Romain Izard
> wrote:
>> Add an arch-specific header to ARM, to retain other optimizations that
>> rely on HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS, while making
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
wrote:
> On 20 September 2017 at 08:18, Romain Izard
> wrote:
>> Add an arch-specific header to ARM, to retain other optimizations that
>> rely on HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS, while making sure that access
>> that explicitly rely on the
Hi Romain,
On 20/09/17 16:18, Romain Izard wrote:
> For the 32-bit ARM architecture, unaligned access support is variable.
> On a chip without a MMU, an unaligned access returns a rotated data word
> and must be avoided.
Nit: that sentence is not really true - there are CPUs without MMUs that
Hi Romain,
On 20/09/17 16:18, Romain Izard wrote:
> For the 32-bit ARM architecture, unaligned access support is variable.
> On a chip without a MMU, an unaligned access returns a rotated data word
> and must be avoided.
Nit: that sentence is not really true - there are CPUs without MMUs that
On 20 September 2017 at 08:41, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 08:26:09AM -0700, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> Hi Romain,
>>
>> On 20 September 2017 at 08:18, Romain Izard
>> wrote:
>> > For the 32-bit ARM architecture,
On 20 September 2017 at 08:41, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 08:26:09AM -0700, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> Hi Romain,
>>
>> On 20 September 2017 at 08:18, Romain Izard
>> wrote:
>> > For the 32-bit ARM architecture, unaligned access support is variable.
>> > On a chip
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 08:26:09AM -0700, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Hi Romain,
>
> On 20 September 2017 at 08:18, Romain Izard
> wrote:
> > For the 32-bit ARM architecture, unaligned access support is variable.
> > On a chip without a MMU, an unaligned access returns a
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 08:26:09AM -0700, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Hi Romain,
>
> On 20 September 2017 at 08:18, Romain Izard
> wrote:
> > For the 32-bit ARM architecture, unaligned access support is variable.
> > On a chip without a MMU, an unaligned access returns a rotated data word
> > and
Hi Romain,
On 20 September 2017 at 08:18, Romain Izard wrote:
> For the 32-bit ARM architecture, unaligned access support is variable.
> On a chip without a MMU, an unaligned access returns a rotated data word
> and must be avoided.
>
> When a MMU is available, it can
Hi Romain,
On 20 September 2017 at 08:18, Romain Izard wrote:
> For the 32-bit ARM architecture, unaligned access support is variable.
> On a chip without a MMU, an unaligned access returns a rotated data word
> and must be avoided.
>
> When a MMU is available, it can be trapped. On ARMv6 or
14 matches
Mail list logo