| To: | kai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: alignment issues on netif_rx |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 15 Dec 2000 08:06:21 -0800 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.10.10012151332190.32035-100000@chaos.thphy.uni-duesseldorf.de> (message from Kai Germaschewski on Fri, 15 Dec 2000 13:41:32 +0100 (CET)) |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.10.10012151332190.32035-100000@chaos.thphy.uni-duesseldorf.de> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 13:41:32 +0100 (CET) From: Kai Germaschewski <kai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Without the above fix of aligning skb->data on a 4-byte boundary, the packet would get dropped later on. Question is: Is this the right way to handle this problem, or should netif_rx be smarter and take unalignment skbs? BTW: Would the above realigning make sense on other archs, too (for performance reasons)? No, the MIPS port must handle unaligned memory accesses traps in kernel mode and fix them up. Every port is required to do this, these can happen anywhere in the networking. Later, David S. Miller davem@xxxxxxxxxx |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: alignment issues on netif_rx, Andi Kleen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: alignment issues on netif_rx, Ralf Baechle |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: alignment issues on netif_rx, Kai Germaschewski |
| Next by Thread: | Re: alignment issues on netif_rx, Ralf Baechle |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |