From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from webmail.tiscalinet.be (webmail1.tiscali.be [212.35.2.121]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB911482A for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 02:47:18 -0700 (MST) To: Randolph Chung Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] "unaligned access to ... at ip=..." problem with evms and jfs Message-ID: <1017913566.3cac20de230de@webmail.tiscalinet.be> Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 11:46:06 +0200 (CEST) From: joel.soete@freebel.net Cc: joel.soete@freebel.net, parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org References: <1017854653.3cab3abdab486@webmail.tiscalinet.be> <20020403181337.GA3759@tausq.org> In-Reply-To: <20020403181337.GA3759@tausq.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org Errors-To: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Quoting Randolph Chung : > > It seems harmless but not sure. > > well.... in general this is not a problem, however.... > > Fleedwood found a bug in the unaligned handler last week. it doesn't > handle the pre/post increment cases of load and store, and there may be > some cases where these messages will indicate the cause of errors. > > I'll look into fixing this, but it might take some time. > Well I will be patient as till now (at least a month) evms seems to works correctly :-) > > I query the ml db and found similar problems (and its solution :_) > )(reiserfs: > > http://lists.parisc-linux.org/hypermail/parisc-linux/5862.html), but I > do not > > very well understand what I have to find the sources (_u32* ?). > > it depends, you need to make sure all the memory accesses happen on > natural boundaries... (e.g. int on 4 byte boundaries, short on 2 byte > boundaries, etc). From the ip reported by the unaligned message you > should be able to trace back to the asm insn and function (if your > objects are not stripped) that is causing the unaligned access. Humm... in evms (not yet investigate jfs) I notice that 4-byte variables are pass to function parameters actualy 2-byte without casting. Could this be a reason? > > randolph > -- > @..@ http://www.TauSq.org/ > (----) > ( >__< ) > ^^ ~~ ^^ > > Thanks for explanation, Joel ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through Tiscali Webmail (http://webmail.tiscali.be)