From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 18:04:52 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: alignment: setup alignment handler earlier In-Reply-To: References: <87ehzstr07.fsf@vostro.fn.ogness.net> <20110907144016.GA30719@e102109-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20110907162857.GB2327@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20110907170452.GC2327@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 05:42:19PM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote: > There are such instructions (ldrd, ldm), but gcc will not emit those > unless the address is known to be aligned. For ARMv6 and later, gcc 4.6 > *will* emit potentially unaligned ldr and ldrh since these very clearly > allow an unaligned address and are faster than the alternatives in all > implementations to date. This is unless strict alignment checking is > explicitly enabled, which unfortunately the Linux kernel does for no > apparent reason at all. "no apparant reason at all" heh. The reason is to keep the code simple and free from bugs. To do otherwise means that each of the CPU files needs to be littered with ifdefs to deal with the alignment fault configuration, of which there are 16 of them (ignoring v6 and v7.) If you think code maintanence of the same thing in 16 places is efficient then I guess there is "no apparant reason". I beg to differ, being one of those folk who have had to edit 18 different places several times. So no, I do not intend to move this: #ifdef CONFIG_ALIGNMENT_TRAP orr r0, r0, #CR_A #else bic r0, r0, #CR_A #endif into 16 separate places in the kernel.