[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110119223234.GA20218@merkur.ravnborg.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 23:32:34 +0100
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, richm@...elvet.org.uk,
609371@...s.debian.org, ben@...adent.org.uk,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
fweisbec@...il.com, mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Bug#609371: linux-image-2.6.37-trunk-sparc64: module scsi_mod:
Unknown relocation: 36
>
> I still wonder how a 32-bit system can generate an unaligned access trap for an
> access to a 64-bit variable aligned on 32-bit, given that there is, by
> definition, no 64-bit memory accesses available on the architecture ?
>From the SPARC V8 manual (this is the 32 bit version of SPARC):
Load/Store Instructions
...
Integer load and store instructions support byte (8-bit), halfword (16-bit), word
(32-bit), and doubleword (64-bit) accesses.
...
Alignment Restrictions
Halfword accesses must be aligned on a 2-byte boundary, word accesses (which
include instruction fetches) must be aligned on a 4-byte boundary, and doubleword
accesses must be aligned on an 8-byte boundary. An improperly aligned
address causes a load or store instruction to generate a mem_address_not_aligned
trap.
Sam
--
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