On Mon, 2008-04-14 at 15:14 -0700, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> Currently there are five implementations:
> 1) packed_struct.h: C-struct based, from asm-generic/unaligned.h
> 2) le_byteshift.h: Open coded byte-swapping, heavily based on asm-arm
> 3) be_byteshift.h: Open coded byte-swapping, heavily based on asm-arm
> 4) memmove.h: taken from multiple implementations in tree
> 5) access_ok.h: taken from x86 and others, unaligned access is ok.
>
> All of the new implementations checks for sizes not equal to 1,2,4,8
> and will fail to link.
This seems like overkill to me. Can't we just use the packed struct
version? GCC should then to the right thing for all architectures.
> API additions:
>
> get_unaligned_{le16|le32|le64|be16|be32|be64}(p) which is meant to replace
> code of the form:
> le16_to_cpu(get_unaligned((__le16 *)p));
>
> put_unaligned_{le16|le32|le64|be16|be32|be64}(val, pointer) which is meant to
> replace code of the form:
> put_unaligned(cpu_to_le16(val), (__le16 *)p);
And couldn't these be macros rather than relying on a boatload of
infrastructure?
--
dwmw2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
