On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > My point is that if the allocator guarantees the alignment (not as a side > effect of the implementation, but per its API) there's no need to check it > again. As the alignement is required, we need an allocator that guarantees it > anyway. I understand, but I'd still prefer to have an explicit check that the hardware alignment requirement is met. There's no cost in doing that (it's a cold path), and even if it would only fail once and with an extremely broken kernel - it's worth it. Will save huge amount of debugging pain (think of the poor guy that will have to debug this...). Thanks, Ohad. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
