[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <84738924-8467-45e4-9e68-0f9633f938f7@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2023 13:02:05 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Amadeusz Sławiński
<amadeuszx.slawinski@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Ding, Shenghao" <shenghao-ding@...com>,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
"Lu, Kevin" <kevin-lu@...com>,
"alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Xu, Baojun" <x1077012@...com>, "Gupta, Peeyush" <peeyush@...com>,
"Navada Kanyana, Mukund" <navada@...com>,
Shenghao Ding <13916275206@....com>,
"lgirdwood@...il.com" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
"perex@...ex.cz" <perex@...ex.cz>,
"pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com"
<pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH v10] ASoC: tas2781: Add tas2781 driver
On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 01:35:34PM +0200, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote:
> It makes sense, as array access reads 8 bit value, you would need to access
> value using pointer instead. So instead of doing be32_to_cpu(test_buf[i])
> you would need to do be32_to_cpu(*(test_buf + i)) if I didn't mess the
> pointer magic ;)
> And then I'm not sure which is better, be32_to_cpup or be32_to_cpu.
The p variant works with unaligned pointers but might be slower if the
architecture doesn't support unaligned access. For this application it
probably doesn't matter either way.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists