On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:06:12 +0800 "Liu Dave-R63238" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Well, that's what the other patch I sent does (the link above), but > > there were wishes then to handle this above the driver layer, hence > > this patch :-) > > > > I'm fine with either way, but if there are other drivers with > > alignment requirements, I'd prefer this variant. > > I believe some Freescale's CPM/QE controllers need care the > alignement requirement. > > If you don't care the performance, you can malloc memory to > get the aligned buffer pool in the initiaize phase, > then use the buffer pool to resolve your alignment issue, of course > It needs a copy, but it avoids to malloc/free buffer in run-time. The malloc is only done once - the first time a non-aligned send is done. After that it's just reused until the alignment requirement exceeds the current allocation (if another interface is set as current). So I think the performance impact is very small. // Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
