On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 11:07:54AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On 31 March 2014 11:59, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 06:24:04PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > >> On 28 March 2014 19:14, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > On Thursday 27 March 2014, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > >> >> Switch the default unaligned access method to 'hardware implemented' > >> >> if HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS is set. > >> >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > > >> > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> > >> > > >> > Is this part of a longer series of patches? If so, please keep > >> > the patch with the others and merge it through an appropriate > >> > tree. > >> > > >> > >> No, not really. I ran into the alignment issue while working on the > >> arm64 crypto stuff, but it is unclear when that will be going in. > >> > >> > If not, I guess I'll have to send it myself, but it will be > >> > the only asm-generic patch for the merge window ;-) > >> > >> Perhaps Catalin is interested in taking it, as arm64 is the only arch > >> that defines HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS /and/ uses the > >> asm-generic version of unaligned.h. > >> > >> @Catalin? > >> > >> http://marc.info/?l=linux-arch&m=139594237116121&w=2 > > > > I can take this, providing it doesn't break anything else. I'll push it > > to -next but won't send it with the first arm64 pull request. > > Yes, please. > > As I said, it can only affect arm64, and only users of > get_unaligned_xx/put_unaligned_xx so it should be safe as far as I can > tell. It actually affects arch/arm as well which selects HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS for v6/v7 and uses the generic unaligned.h -- Catalin -- 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
