From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: add get_user() support for 8 byte types Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:19:37 +0000 Message-ID: <201211150919.37343.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1352495853-9790-1-git-send-email-rob.clark@linaro.org> <201211130911.09613.arnd@arndb.de> <20121113112430.GF28341@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20121113112430.GF28341@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Rob Clark , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, patches@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 13 November 2012, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > You're missing something; that is one of the greatest powers of open > source. The many eyes (and minds) effect. Someone out there probably > has a solution to whatever problem, the trick is to find that person. :) > > I think we have a working solution for this for ARM. It won't be suitable > for every arch, where they have 8-bit and 16-bit registers able to be > allocated by the compiler, but for architectures where the minimum register > size is 32-bit, what we have below should work. I don't mind at all adding the extension to ARM, and I think it's pretty cool that you guys actually found a working solution. The part that worries me is that we are making architecture independent code depend on a clever hack that may or may not be possible to implement on a given architecture, and that most architecture maintainers wouldn't know how to implement correctly even if it's possible. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:19:37 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: add get_user() support for 8 byte types In-Reply-To: <20121113112430.GF28341@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1352495853-9790-1-git-send-email-rob.clark@linaro.org> <201211130911.09613.arnd@arndb.de> <20121113112430.GF28341@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <201211150919.37343.arnd@arndb.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tuesday 13 November 2012, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > You're missing something; that is one of the greatest powers of open > source. The many eyes (and minds) effect. Someone out there probably > has a solution to whatever problem, the trick is to find that person. :) > > I think we have a working solution for this for ARM. It won't be suitable > for every arch, where they have 8-bit and 16-bit registers able to be > allocated by the compiler, but for architectures where the minimum register > size is 32-bit, what we have below should work. I don't mind at all adding the extension to ARM, and I think it's pretty cool that you guys actually found a working solution. The part that worries me is that we are making architecture independent code depend on a clever hack that may or may not be possible to implement on a given architecture, and that most architecture maintainers wouldn't know how to implement correctly even if it's possible. Arnd