[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070214101750.587d42db.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 10:17:50 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...elEye.com>
Cc: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] (2nd try) add epoll compat code to kernel/compat.c ...
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 08:43:05 -0600 James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...elEye.com> wrote:
>
> Not for parisc at the instruction level. In narrow mode (32 bit mode),
> a u64 load has to be done by two 32 bit loads which gives it a 4 byte
> alignment requirement. In wide mode (64 bit mode) the 64 bit load
> instruction explicitly requires 8 byte alignment, so our u64 alignment
> requirements are different. However, this is from the machine code
> point of view. I can't say that gcc doesn't enforce an artificial 8
> byte alignment of u64 in narrow mode, so I'll defer to the gcc experts
> on that one.
Of course, gcc enforced alignment is all we really care about.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@...b.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists