[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100917.201704.181464273.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 20:17:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: james@...anarts.com
Cc: sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, airlied@...hat.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, marcin.slusarz@...il.com,
FlorianSchandinat@....de, vda.linux@...glemail.com,
jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, jsimmons@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fbmem: Fix fb_read, fb_write unaligned accesses.
From: James Hogan <james@...anarts.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 01:23:47 +0100
> Apologies for corrupted patch. I'll try again.
> Comments? I'd also appreciate if somebody familiar with sbus on sparc
> could check this patch is sane since I know virtually nothing about sbus
> and am not in a position to compile for sparc, let alone test on it:
>
> fb_{read,write} access the framebuffer using lots of fb_{read,write}l's
> but don't check that the file position is aligned which can cause
> problems on some architectures which do not support unaligned accesses.
>
> Since the operations are essentially memcpy_{from,to}io, new
> fb_memcpy_{from,to}fb macros have been defined and these are used
> instead.
>
> For Sparc, fb_{read,write} macros use sbus_{read,write}, so this defines
> new sbus_memcpy_{from,to}io functions the same as memcpy_{from,to}io but
> using sbus_{read,write}b instead of {read,write}b.
>
> Signed-off-by: James Hogan <james@...anarts.com>
Compiles cleanly on sparc and looks correct to me:
Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
--
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