[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 13:59:54 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: linux@....linux.org.uk
Cc: arnd@...db.de, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, Ulrich.Weigand@...ibm.com,
gcc@....gnu.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
peter.maydell@...aro.org
Subject: Re: ARM unaligned MMIO access with attribute((packed))
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 21:45:22 +0000
> On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 01:38:31PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
>> Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 16:37:02 +0000
>>
>> > 1. there's no way to tell GCC that the inline assembly is a load
>> > instruction and therefore it needs to schedule the following
>> > instructions appropriately.
>>
>> Just add a dummy '"m" (pointer)' asm input argument to the inline asm
>> statement. Just make sure "typeof(pointer)" has a size matching the
>> size of the load your are performing.
>
> That involves this problematical cast from a packed struct pointer to
> an unsigned long pointer, which according to the C standard and GCC
> folk is undefined.
It's alignment may be undefined, but it's size definitely is well
defined and that's what matters here.
> Practice over the last 15 years on ARM has also shown that this is not
> necessary.
Sorry oh big super man, little ole' me is only a kernel newbie.
--
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