Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762161AbYBRW5k (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:57:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753760AbYBRW5c (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:57:32 -0500 Received: from vs166246.vserver.de ([62.75.166.246]:54319 "EHLO vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753576AbYBRW5b (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:57:31 -0500 From: Michael Buesch To: Harvey Harrison Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Fix b43 driver build for arm Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 23:56:45 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) Cc: Russell King , Gordon Farquharson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linville@tuxdriver.com, stefano.brivio@polimi.it References: <97a0a9ac0802181403ja79c32v864b093414b2755@mail.gmail.com> <200802182343.12749.mb@bu3sch.de> <1203375030.5757.75.camel@brick> In-Reply-To: <1203375030.5757.75.camel@brick> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200802182356.45858.mb@bu3sch.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1517 Lines: 43 On Monday 18 February 2008 23:50:30 Harvey Harrison wrote: > On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 23:43 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote: > > On Monday 18 February 2008 23:34:10 Russell King wrote: > > > > > > Well, don't expect this driver to work until you fix your broken > > > assumptions about alignment requirements. > > > > Mr King, I'm not an idiot! > > > > Can you _please_ explain what makes ARM so special here? > > Why can't we have an array of this structure on ARM? > > > > struct ssb_device_id { > > __u16 vendor; > > __u16 coreid; > > __u8 revision; > > }; > > > > I will not apply any patches that I don't understand. > > Why doesn't the compiler handle this? What's special? Can you please explain? > > > > I believe this is a good place to start (although I could be totally > off-base) > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/11/22/120 I know very well what unaligned access is. As I said the code works on MIPS, which can't do unaligned accesses. The _real_ question is, why doesn't align the compiler the stuff properly on ARM? It does the right thing on x86_32/64, powerpc and MIPS. Why doesn't it do the right thing on ARM and we have to manually align stuff? See section "Code that doesn't cause unaligned access" -- Greetings Michael. -- 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/