[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20061212183826.6edb3a3f.akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 18:38:26 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To: Erik Jacobson <erikj@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, guillaume.thouvenin@...l.net,
matthltc@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] connector: Some fixes for ia64 unaligned access errors
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:31:32 -0600
Erik Jacobson <erikj@....com> wrote:
> > But it's rather a lot of churn for such a thing. Did you consider simply using
> > put_unaligned() against the specific offending field(s)?
>
> Hi. This was not considered.
>
> I wanted to give you some quick feedback, so I tried your suggestion in the
> fork path. It seemed to fix the problem as well.
OK.
> put_unaligned(timespec_to_ns(&ts), (__u64 *) &ev->timestamp_ns);
>
> Is what I tried.
>
> I'm on vacation tomorrow but on Thursday, if you like, I can whip up
> a patch that does this and test it more thoroughly. Is this the
> direction you prefer? What I did just now was really quick and dirty
> to see if it has a shot or not but it looks like put_unaligned will
> fix it too.
>
Well it's a one-liner and it makes it very clear what's going on. So
unless there's some undiscovered downside, yes, I think it's a good way to
go. It'll be an easier patch for the -stable guys to swallow too.
There's no particular hurry on it.
-
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