[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP717C72ABCA411607037A9796C80@phx.gbl>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:48:43 -0500
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC: David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
hpa@...or.com, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de,
andi@...stfloor.org, roland@...hat.com, rth@...hat.com,
masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
avi@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, sam@...nborg.org,
michael@...erman.id.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: update for .39
* Steven Rostedt (rostedt@...dmis.org) wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 16:22 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> > > Anyway, I think the best thing for now is to have Jason add
> > > the .align(sizeof(long)) in the inline assembly for all locations and be
> > > done with it.
> >
> > You seem to be contradicting yourself here. I'm concerned about having
> > "structures" of a size not power of two. Can we simply either
>
> But we don't have structures. We have data that has been allocated in
> assembly. Come to think of it, it may be best to keep these as
> ".align 4".
The .align 4 is certainly not the right answer, because it will trigger
unaligned accesses on some 64-bit architectures, as we have faced with
trace event.
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
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