Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191031050338.12700-1-csm10495@gmail.com> <20191031133921.GA4763@lst.de>
 <CANSCoS8rN6g7u6iG4SRTcXjdj68cbimvX1n1Ex+FBAkhAAivJA@mail.gmail.com> <20191031135904.GA5180@lst.de>
In-Reply-To: <20191031135904.GA5180@lst.de>
From:   Charles Machalow <csm10495@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 31 Oct 2019 08:39:05 -0700
Message-ID: <CANSCoS_GtDm2=FR8grhWHwm5-Aqvqb=4u+z=auY4e1y5eS3Q2w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme: change nvme_passthru_cmd64's result field.
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc:     linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, marta.rybczynska@kalray.eu,
        Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 6:59 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> You might like the idea, but it fundamentally is a bad idea.  For example
> you completely break architectures that do not support unaligned loads
> and stores.

Would you also be against the idea of memcpy the u32 array into a u64 then
passing a pointer to that local variable lower?

- Charlie Scott Machalow