On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 08:21:18 -0700
Grant Grundler <grantgrundler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> Should this hash_table be converted from u16 hash_table[32] to
> >> >> DECLARE_BITMAP(hash_table, 16 * 32) to ensure that it is aligned
> >> >> on long-word boundary?
> >> >
> >> > I think hash_table is already long-word aligned because it is placed
> >> > right after a pointer.
> >>
> >> I recommend converting to proper bitmap. Because such an implicit
> >> assumption is easily broken by someone touching this function.
> >
> > Do you mean something like:
> > DECLARE_BITMAP(__hash_table, 16 * 32);
> > u16 *hash_table = (u16 *)__hash_table;
> > ?
> >
> > Grant, what do you think about this?
>
> Hi Takuya,
> two thoughts:
> 1) while I agree with Akinobu and thank him for pointing out a
> _potential_ alignment problem, this is a separate issue and your
> existing patch should go in anyway. There are probably other drivers
> with _potential_ alignment issues. Akinobu could get credit for
> finding them by submitting patches after reviewing calls to set_bit
> and set_bit_le() - similar to what you are doing now.
I prefer approach 1.
hash_table is local in build_setup_frame_hash(), so if further
improvement is also required, we can do that locally there later.
Thanks,
Takuya
> 2) I generally do not like declaring one type and then using an alias
> of a different type to reference the same memory address. We have a
> simple alternative since hash_table[] is indexed directly only in one
> hunk of code:
> for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
> *setup_frm++ = ((u16 *)hash_table)[i];
> *setup_frm++ = ((u16 *)hash_table)[i];
> }
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
