[lkml]   [2004]   [Jun]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2.4] jffs2 aligment problems
On Monday 07 June 2004 23:29, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-06-07 at 22:56 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > So we did not care if it took ms + x µs due to an alignement trap
> Indeed. But since many machines I care about can't fix up unaligned
> accesses I'm _more_ than happy to obey the original decree that I should
> put back the get_unaligned() calls; just ignoring the stated reasons.
> Let's not argue Linus out of it :)

I do not argue. I just stated why nobody took care of it.

Cite from old mail's:
> Yes. Enable the alignment abort handler. In later kernels, its a
> fundamental requirement that the alignment abort handler is enabled
> before you'll even get to see the jffs2 or MTD options.

>> Checking this before the unaligned access would be faster <SNIP>
> It's handled by the alignment abort handler already.

Steve Ballmer quotes the statistic that IT pros spend 70 percent of their
time managing existing systems. That couldn’t have anything to do with
the fact that 99 percent of these systems run Windows, could it?
linutronix - competence in embedded & realtime linux

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:03    [W:0.041 / U:1.868 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site