On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 01:23:47 +0100
James Hogan <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Apologies for corrupted patch. I'll try again.
> Comments? I'd also appreciate if somebody familiar with sbus on sparc
> could check this patch is sane since I know virtually nothing about sbus
> and am not in a position to compile for sparc, let alone test on it:
>
> fb_{read,write} access the framebuffer using lots of fb_{read,write}l's
> but don't check that the file position is aligned which can cause
> problems on some architectures which do not support unaligned accesses.
What are these "problems"?
I'd have thought they would be fairly fatal, in which case this is a
high-priority patch. But I'd also have thought that the problems would
have been noted before now.
So I assume that you're doing something which nobody has done before.
Confused. Help?
> Since the operations are essentially memcpy_{from,to}io, new
> fb_memcpy_{from,to}fb macros have been defined and these are used
> instead.
>
> For Sparc, fb_{read,write} macros use sbus_{read,write}, so this defines
> new sbus_memcpy_{from,to}io functions the same as memcpy_{from,to}io but
> using sbus_{read,write}b instead of {read,write}b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
