On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:45:56AM -0500, Chen, Gong wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/erst.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/erst.c
> index 26311f2..bf30a12 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/erst.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/erst.c
> @@ -611,7 +611,7 @@ static void __erst_record_id_cache_compact(void)
> if (entries[i] == APEI_ERST_INVALID_RECORD_ID)
> continue;
> if (wpos != i)
> - memcpy(&entries[wpos], &entries[i], sizeof(entries[i]));
> + entries[wpos] = entries[i];
Why is it ok to drop the memcpy here and do a normal access?
__erst_record_id_cache_add_one still has a memcpy-like access.
What is the difference with all those accesses to erst_record_id_cache
and why doesn't it need the unaligned helpers?
This all needs to be explained in detail in the commit message.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
