lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: Word-at-a-time dcache name accesses (was Re: .. anybody know of any filesystems that depend on the exact VFS 'namehash' implementation?)
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:17 PM,  <david@lang.hm> wrote:
>
> or did some CPUs have efficient char access, but inefficient unaligned word
> access?

Tons of CPU's have efficient char accesses but horrible unaligned word
accesses. Some are even outright buggy (ie at least some ARM cores)
and load crap. Others take a fault.

They just aren't x86, because x86 has traditionally had code with a
fair amount of unaligned loads and stores (and not just for historical
reasons either: even modern code replaces constant-sized memcpy() etc
with direct loads and stores)

For some other architectures, we could just use "get_unaligned()",
which fixes things up for them. I could have made that explicit, even
if it doesn't matter on x86.

So the bigger portability problem to some degree is the fact that it
is limited to little-endian, so even if you have a CPU with good
unaligned accesses (some POWER chips do ok, for example, although not
all), you'd have to also do something with the mask generation (which
currently uses the "(x-1)&~x" trick that means that it generates the
mask of the *low bits* - and then assumes that "low bits" means "first
bytes" - ie little endian).

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-03 01:27    [W:3.025 / U:0.000 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site