[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <474C50D7.5010901@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:16:07 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>, dsd@...too.org,
davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: wireless vs. alignment requirements
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> Herbert Xu wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 02:49:36PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>
>>> Right. I just didn't think that would be a valid value for an
>>> architecture to set.
>>>
>>
>> OK. Let me clarify this a bit more. We require at least one
>> of the following rules to be met:
>>
>> * the IPv4/IPv6 header is aligned by 8 bytes on reception;
>> * or the platform provides unaligned exception handlers.
>>
>> So if your platform violates both rules then it won't work with
>> the IP stack, simple as that. Fortunately I don't think such a
>> platform exists currently on Linux.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>
> Then what about hardware that can't dma ethernet to non-aligned address.
> Sky2 hardware breaks if DMA is not 8 byte aligned. IMHO the IP stack
> should handle any alignment, and do the appropriate memove if the CPU requires
> alignment.
I wrote a patch for the IP stack to realign packets if necessary at one
point. I should dredge it up again and submit it for collective flamage.
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists