[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612061717030.3542@woody.osdl.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 17:18:48 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
To: Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, akpm@...l.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] WorkStruct: Implement generic UP cmpxchg() where an arch
doesn't support it
On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Roman Zippel wrote:
> >
> > Any _real_ CPU will simply never care about _anything_ else than just the
> > size of the datum in question.
>
> ..or alignment which a dedicated atomic type would allow to be attached.
Can you give any example of a real CPU where alignment matters?
Sure, it needs to be naturally aligned, but that's true of _any_ type in
the kernel. We don't do unaligneds without "get_unaligned()" and friends.
Btw, if you want to leave out 8-bit and 16-bit data, that's fine. So
generally you'd only need to handle 32-bit (and 64-bit on a 64-bit
architecture) accesses anyway.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists