From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <52E10594.4010901@xenomai.org> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:05:40 +0100 From: Gilles Chanteperdrix MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <52DF9C5F.70005@geral.com> <52DFAA18.6080703@xenomai.org> <52DFAD29.4000800@geral.com> <52DFB2DE.4050501@xenomai.org> <52DFC734.2090906@geral.com> <52DFC80D.6050101@xenomai.org> <52DFCFDE.9060700@geral.com> <52DFD1B0.6070303@xenomai.org> <52E0E93C.8010209@xenomai.org> <1bab8396d7c946110418979cb8177d9b@grandegger.com> In-Reply-To: <1bab8396d7c946110418979cb8177d9b@grandegger.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai] imx28 rtcan flexcan system freezes List-Id: Discussions about the Xenomai project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Wolfgang Grandegger Cc: Wolfgang Grandegger , xenomai@xenomai.org On 01/23/2014 12:36 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > How are unaligned accesses handled on your system? Alexandre, > > what does "cat /proc/cpu/alignment" report? Aligned access > > would be better, I agree. The imx28 can not support unaligned accesses in hardware. The unaligned access causes an exception, /proc/cpu/alignment thus only allow choosing how the exception is handled. >> Wolfgang, what do you think? Should we change the alignment of > >> rtcan_rb_frame::data, or use put_unaligned on ARM? > > > > I realized the mail and wonder why this problem does not show up with > > vanilla Vanilla handles the alignment trap by emulating the faulting instruction. Last time I checked, there were some problems related to running the emulation over xenomai domain, though looking at the code now, I see nothing which would prevent us from doing it. -- Gilles.