From: Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 11:03:17 -0800 > On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 13:57 -0500, David Miller wrote: >> From: Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 09:16:57 +0100 >> >> > Other than that, I guess I'll apply this, but I really wish there was a >> > way to distinguish more easily which of these require alignment and >> > which don't. >> >> You can't apply "this" without the dependency patch #1. >> >> Therefore this should probably all go through my tree. > > Hey David. > > The eth_<foo>_addr functions already exist so > 1/14 isn't a dependency. > > It's just a trivial improvement on existing code > with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS and > at least the arm 4.6.3 compiler. You're right. But I think we're skipping this series for now, see my other reply. If GCC can't emit as good an inline memset as we can come up with for 6 byte constant lengths, that's a GCC bug that should be fixed. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
