[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH/RFC v2] introduce ARCH_CAN_UNALIGNED_ACCESS Kconfig symbol

> I think you're semantically testing the wrong thing.
> It's not if unaligned accesses are supported, it's if they are
> efficient enough or not.
> For example, sparc64 fully handles unaligned accesses but taking the
> trap to fix it up is slow. So sparc64 "can" handle unaligned
> accesses, but whether we want to set this symbol or not is another
> matter.

Yeah, good point. Should I rename it to HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
or similar? Or have it defined as some sort of number so you can make
actually make tradeoffs? Like Dave Woodhouse suggested at some point to
have get_unaligned() take an argument that indicates the probability...

[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-03-20 22:25    [W:0.127 / U:1.664 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site