On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 02:34:41PM +0100, Pierre Ossman wrote: > On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 00:15:53 +0000 (GMT) > Daniel Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Being spoilt by the luxuries of i386/x86_64 I've never really had a good > > grasp on unaligned memory access problems on other architectures and decided > > it was time to figure it out. As a result I've written this documentation > > which I plan to submit for inclusion as > > Documentation/unaligned_memory_access.txt > > > > Before I do so, any comments on the following? > > > > A very nice, and much needed document. I think you should include one thing > though: > > memcpy() is _only_ safe when one of the pointers is char* or void*. If it is > anything more complex than that, gcc will assume alignment and optimise based > on that. E.g. memcpy() of two long:s generates the same assembly as doing an > assignment.
Dumb memcpy (while (len--) { *d++ = *s++ }) will have alignment problems
in any case. Intelligent ones, like the one provided in glibc, first copy
bytes till output is aligned (C file) *or* size is a multiple (i686 asm file)
of word size, and then it copies word-by-word.
Linux's x86_64 memcpy does the opposite, copies 64bit words, and then
copies the last bytes.
So, in effect, as long as no packed structures are used, memcpy should
be safer on *int, etc., than *char, as the compiler ensures
word-alignment.
--
lfr
0/0
pgpQa3znDcMST.pgp
Description: PGP signature
