Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH/RFC v2] introduce ARCH_CAN_UNALIGNED_ACCESS Kconfig symbol | From | Johannes Berg <> | Date | Thu, 20 Mar 2008 22:21:46 +0100 |
| |
> 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...
johannes [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
| |