[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160410024006.GA695@swordfish>
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 11:40:06 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
To: Rui Salvaterra <rsalvaterra@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com, sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, eunb.song@...sung.com,
minchan@...nel.org, chanho.min@....com, kyungsik.lee@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] lib: lz4: cleanup unaligned access efficiency
detection
On (04/09/16 22:05), Rui Salvaterra wrote:
> These identifiers are bogus. The interested architectures should define
> HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS whenever relevant to do so. If this
> isn't true for some arch, it should be fixed in the arch definition.
yes, besides ARM_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS exists only in lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
> Signed-off-by: Rui Salvaterra <rsalvaterra@...il.com>
Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
-ss
> ---
> lib/lz4/lz4defs.h | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h b/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
> index 0710a62..c79d7ea 100644
> --- a/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
> +++ b/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
> @@ -24,9 +24,7 @@
> typedef struct _U16_S { u16 v; } U16_S;
> typedef struct _U32_S { u32 v; } U32_S;
> typedef struct _U64_S { u64 v; } U64_S;
> -#if defined(CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS) \
> - || defined(CONFIG_ARM) && __LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ >= 6 \
> - && defined(ARM_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS)
> +#if defined(CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS)
>
> #define A16(x) (((U16_S *)(x))->v)
> #define A32(x) (((U32_S *)(x))->v)
> --
> 2.7.4
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists