[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d20680b3-f71e-9eb7-f79c-660e25673d82@synopsys.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 15:30:19 -0800
From: Vineet Gupta <vineet.gupta1@...opsys.com>
To: Alexey Brodkin <alexey.brodkin@...opsys.com>
CC: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
"linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARC: Explicitly set ARCH_SLAB_MINALIGN = 8
On 2/18/19 12:53 AM, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> So are you OK with this patch or something should be done before applying?
Or your original patch was
+#ifdef CONFIG_ARC_HAS_LL64
+#define ARCH_SLAB_MINALIGN 8
+#endif
I don't think this issue is related to LL64 at all. A long long on ARC could be 4
byte aligned (as mandated by the ABI). It could use LDD or 2 separate LDs. This
has no bearing on the fact that LLOCKD have to use a 64-bit aligned addresses. So
I think we should just do this unconditionally. Agree ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists