lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Mar]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: update for .39
    From
    Date
    On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 17:48 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
    > * Steven Rostedt (rostedt@goodmis.org) wrote:
    > > On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 16:22 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
    > >
    > > > > Anyway, I think the best thing for now is to have Jason add
    > > > > the .align(sizeof(long)) in the inline assembly for all locations and be
    > > > > done with it.
    > > >
    > > > You seem to be contradicting yourself here. I'm concerned about having
    > > > "structures" of a size not power of two. Can we simply either
    > >
    > > But we don't have structures. We have data that has been allocated in
    > > assembly. Come to think of it, it may be best to keep these as
    > > ".align 4".
    >
    > The .align 4 is certainly not the right answer, because it will trigger
    > unaligned accesses on some 64-bit architectures, as we have faced with
    > trace event.

    Will it? Seems that sparc does this regardless.

    Remember, this is 3 natural word sized objects, and vmlinux.ld starts
    the section off with .ALIGN 8, hence, the section is already 8 byte
    aligned, all objects within this section are 8 bytes (for 64bit archs,
    and 4 bytes for 32bit), why would saying ".align 4" cause the linker to
    add holes to make it 4 byte aligned when it is already 8 byte aligned.
    The ".align 4" should work with both 32bit and 64bit archs.

    -- Steve




    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-03-11 00:19    [W:0.054 / U:32.164 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site