On 30.08.2010 20:03, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Le 30/08/2010 18:47, Detlev Zundel a écrit : >> Hi Reinhard, >> >>> Detlev Zundel schrieb: >>> >>>>> Detlev, regarding the discussion I would only point out that we have to >>>>> be sure that such kind of patch will be merged in the current release. >>>>> It would be a real pity if a new official realease is published and then >>>>> even a simple "md" command does not work on ARM. >>>> >>>> I don't see a problem here. All proposed patches (with/without >>>> attribute and union) surely fix a bug, so they will go into mainline >>>> when consent is reached on which one to use. This should well happen >>>> before the pending release on September 12th[1]. >>>> >>>> Am I misunderstanding anything here? >>> >>> No... but I would require that the "union" approach would be wanted, >>> BEFORE I put effort into doing it. >> >> I'd very much appreciate your effort as I want the solution now that you >> did whet my appetite. > > Besides, re: 'fixing with the side-effect of a different thing': I think > the alignment caused by using an union is not actually a side effect of > it but an intended effect of it, as the compiler must ensure correct > alignment of each union member -- on architectures where alignment of > 32-bit ints is unnecessary, the union will not cause undue alignment, > whereas the __aligned__ attribute would. > > Amicalement,
I'll provide a patch tomorrow, right now I am not near a LinuX system ;) Reinhard _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
