| To: | greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Ben Greear) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: conflicting alignment requirements |
| From: | kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Date: | Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:24:37 +0400 (MSK DST) |
| Cc: | ralf@xxxxxxxxxxx, jacoba@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <3B6823AB.4D931195@candelatech.com> from "Ben Greear" at Aug 1, 1 08:43:39 am |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Hello! > I was recently asked to remove the get/put_unaligned code from my > VLAN patch, which I did. However, I don't want to now pay a > performance penalty on Sparc, or whatever... I am sorry, but your get/put_unligned were 16 bit, which is full non-sense. :-) Anyway, even if you got 32 bit values, nobody suffers, including even those arms which corrupt data on unaligned accesses. 802.1q is aligned to blue book and it has the same alignnment as IP. > So, what are the drawbacks of using get/put_unaligned? It is prohibited for anything but IPX etc, which really need to get unaligned values. Alexey |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: IPv6 fragmentation and IPv6 header parsing, kuznet |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: IPv6 fragmentation and IPv6 header parsing, Brad Chapman |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: conflicting alignment requirements, Ben Greear |
| Next by Thread: | Re: conflicting alignment requirements, Ralf Baechle |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |