Re: [PATCH 2 of 2] __raw_memcpy_toio32 for x86_64

On Thursday 12 January 2006 02:32, Roland Dreier wrote:
>     Andi> Well then they can just as well use normal memcpy as long as
>     Andi> they don't pass any sizes % 4 != 0. That should be ok as
>     Andi> long as they add a comment there.
> 
> But then the driver will be doing memcpy() to I/O memory, which may
> work by chance on x86_64 but will blow up on other archs.

I meant aliasing it to memcpy on x86-64

But with the nasty qword splitup assumptions it would be wrong anyways,
so scratch that.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH 2 of 2] __raw_memcpy_toio32 for x86_64
    • From: "Bryan O'Sullivan" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 2 of 2] __raw_memcpy_toio32 for x86_64
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 2 of 2] __raw_memcpy_toio32 for x86_64
    • From: Roland Dreier <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: OT: fork(): parent or child should run first?
• Next by Date: Re: PPC build broken (last two days)
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 2 of 2] __raw_memcpy_toio32 for x86_64
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 2 of 2] __raw_memcpy_toio32 for x86_64
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]