* Misunderstanding with function cpm_dpalloc in Linux 2.6.x @ 2006-01-25 13:48 Laurent Lagrange 2006-01-25 16:14 ` Pantelis Antoniou 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Laurent Lagrange @ 2006-01-25 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linuxppc-embedded Hello, I work on MPC boards with Linux 2.6.9 and I have a problem with the cpm_dpalloc function. In the file cpm2_common.c the function "uint cpm_dpalloc(uint size, uint align)" is intended to allocate a piece of memory in the dpram. This piece of memory has at least "size" bytes and I beleived that the returned address should be aligned on "align" bytes. This function calls "void *rh_alloc(rh_info_t * info, int size, const char *owner)" from rheap.c file. In this function the alignment is only used to calculate the right size with the formula : size = (size + (info->alignment - 1)) & ~(info->alignment - 1); It seems to be right but the alignment is not used to retreive an aligned start address. So if I do the following sequential calls, I have the following results : cpm_dpalloc(16, 8) -> 0XC0 -> right aligned cpm_dpalloc(64, 64) -> 0XD0 -> wrong aligned -> must be 0x100 cpm_dpalloc(16, 8) -> 0X110 -> right aligned but wrong to use cpm_dpalloc(24, 8) -> 0X1200 -> right aligned but wrong to use I can have the wanted values if instead of size, I try to allocate (size + align - 1) bytes but I don't think it is the solution. Perhaps, I don't understand the allocation theory. Any idea ? Thanks all Laurent ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Misunderstanding with function cpm_dpalloc in Linux 2.6.x 2006-01-25 13:48 Misunderstanding with function cpm_dpalloc in Linux 2.6.x Laurent Lagrange @ 2006-01-25 16:14 ` Pantelis Antoniou 2006-07-04 15:37 ` Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved Laurent Lagrange 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Pantelis Antoniou @ 2006-01-25 16:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linuxppc-embedded [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1507 bytes --] On Wednesday 25 January 2006 15:48, Laurent Lagrange wrote: > > Hello, > > I work on MPC boards with Linux 2.6.9 and I have a problem with the > cpm_dpalloc function. > > In the file cpm2_common.c the function "uint cpm_dpalloc(uint size, uint > align)" is intended > to allocate a piece of memory in the dpram. This piece of memory has at > least "size" bytes > and I beleived that the returned address should be aligned on "align" bytes. > > This function calls "void *rh_alloc(rh_info_t * info, int size, const char > *owner)" from rheap.c file. > In this function the alignment is only used to calculate the right size with > the formula : > size = (size + (info->alignment - 1)) & ~(info->alignment - 1); > It seems to be right but the alignment is not used to retreive an aligned > start address. > > So if I do the following sequential calls, I have the following results : > cpm_dpalloc(16, 8) -> 0XC0 -> right aligned > cpm_dpalloc(64, 64) -> 0XD0 -> wrong aligned -> must be 0x100 > cpm_dpalloc(16, 8) -> 0X110 -> right aligned but wrong to use > cpm_dpalloc(24, 8) -> 0X1200 -> right aligned but wrong to use > > I can have the wanted values if instead of size, I try to allocate (size + > align - 1) bytes > but I don't think it is the solution. > > Perhaps, I don't understand the allocation theory. > Any idea ? > > Thanks all > Laurent > > Laurent Hi, Yes this is a know bug. This patch fixes it. Marcelo, please apply - we have this hanging for quite a while. Pantelis [-- Attachment #2: cpm2-dpalloc.patch --] [-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 4160 bytes --] diff --git a/arch/ppc/lib/rheap.c b/arch/ppc/lib/rheap.c --- a/arch/ppc/lib/rheap.c +++ b/arch/ppc/lib/rheap.c @@ -425,17 +425,21 @@ void *rh_detach_region(rh_info_t * info, return (void *)s; } -void *rh_alloc(rh_info_t * info, int size, const char *owner) +void *rh_alloc_align(rh_info_t * info, int size, int alignment, const char *owner) { struct list_head *l; rh_block_t *blk; rh_block_t *newblk; void *start; - /* Validate size */ - if (size <= 0) + /* Validate size, (must be power of two) */ + if (size <= 0 || (alignment & (alignment - 1)) != 0) return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); + /* given alignment larger that default rheap alignment */ + if (alignment > info->alignment) + size += alignment - 1; + /* Align to configured alignment */ size = (size + (info->alignment - 1)) & ~(info->alignment - 1); @@ -478,9 +482,21 @@ void *rh_alloc(rh_info_t * info, int siz attach_taken_block(info, newblk); + /* for larger alignment return fixed up pointer */ + /* this is no problem with the deallocator since */ + /* we scan for pointers that lie in the blocks */ + if (alignment > info->alignment) + start = (void *)(((unsigned long)start + alignment - 1) & + ~(alignment - 1)); + return start; } +void *rh_alloc(rh_info_t * info, int size, const char *owner) +{ + return rh_alloc_align(info, size, info->alignment, owner); +} + /* allocate at precisely the given address */ void *rh_alloc_fixed(rh_info_t * info, void *start, int size, const char *owner) { diff --git a/arch/ppc/syslib/cpm2_common.c b/arch/ppc/syslib/cpm2_common.c --- a/arch/ppc/syslib/cpm2_common.c +++ b/arch/ppc/syslib/cpm2_common.c @@ -148,8 +148,7 @@ uint cpm_dpalloc(uint size, uint align) unsigned long flags; spin_lock_irqsave(&cpm_dpmem_lock, flags); - cpm_dpmem_info.alignment = align; - start = rh_alloc(&cpm_dpmem_info, size, "commproc"); + start = rh_alloc_align(&cpm_dpmem_info, size, align, "commproc"); spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cpm_dpmem_lock, flags); return (uint)start; @@ -170,13 +169,12 @@ int cpm_dpfree(uint offset) EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpm_dpfree); /* not sure if this is ever needed */ -uint cpm_dpalloc_fixed(uint offset, uint size, uint align) +uint cpm_dpalloc_fixed(uint offset, uint size) { void *start; unsigned long flags; spin_lock_irqsave(&cpm_dpmem_lock, flags); - cpm_dpmem_info.alignment = align; start = rh_alloc_fixed(&cpm_dpmem_info, (void *)offset, size, "commproc"); spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cpm_dpmem_lock, flags); diff --git a/include/asm-ppc/commproc.h b/include/asm-ppc/commproc.h --- a/include/asm-ppc/commproc.h +++ b/include/asm-ppc/commproc.h @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ static inline long IS_DPERR(const uint o extern cpm8xx_t *cpmp; /* Pointer to comm processor */ extern uint cpm_dpalloc(uint size, uint align); extern int cpm_dpfree(uint offset); -extern uint cpm_dpalloc_fixed(uint offset, uint size, uint align); +extern uint cpm_dpalloc_fixed(uint offset, uint size); extern void cpm_dpdump(void); extern void *cpm_dpram_addr(uint offset); extern void cpm_setbrg(uint brg, uint rate); diff --git a/include/asm-ppc/cpm2.h b/include/asm-ppc/cpm2.h --- a/include/asm-ppc/cpm2.h +++ b/include/asm-ppc/cpm2.h @@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ extern cpm_cpm2_t *cpmp; /* Pointer to extern uint cpm_dpalloc(uint size, uint align); extern int cpm_dpfree(uint offset); -extern uint cpm_dpalloc_fixed(uint offset, uint size, uint align); +extern uint cpm_dpalloc_fixed(uint offset, uint size); extern void cpm_dpdump(void); extern void *cpm_dpram_addr(uint offset); extern void cpm_setbrg(uint brg, uint rate); diff --git a/include/asm-ppc/rheap.h b/include/asm-ppc/rheap.h --- a/include/asm-ppc/rheap.h +++ b/include/asm-ppc/rheap.h @@ -62,6 +62,10 @@ extern int rh_attach_region(rh_info_t * /* Detach a free region */ extern void *rh_detach_region(rh_info_t * info, void *start, int size); +/* Allocate the given size from the remote heap (with alignment) */ +extern void *rh_alloc_align(rh_info_t * info, int size, int alignment, + const char *owner); + /* Allocate the given size from the remote heap */ extern void *rh_alloc(rh_info_t * info, int size, const char *owner); ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved 2006-01-25 16:14 ` Pantelis Antoniou @ 2006-07-04 15:37 ` Laurent Lagrange 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Laurent Lagrange @ 2006-07-04 15:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: pantelis; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded Hello Pantelis, Few months ago (25 January 2006), I sent a mail about an alignment bug in cpm_dpalloc. I applied and verified the provided patch. I was very satisfied with the result. Today I port a driver from Linux 2.4 to Linux 2.6 and I have strange results. The driver allocates rx and tx bds (8 bytes aligned) in the module_init for 4 SCC ports. That is always right. Then one port is opened by an application and a user configuration is set via an ioctl (set_conf). This ioctl first frees the old bds : cpm_dpfree(chan->rx_bd_offset); cpm_dpfree(chan->tx_bd_offset); then allocates the new ones : chan->rx_bd_offset = cpm_dpalloc(sizeof(cbd_t) * chan->conf.rx_bufnbr, 8); chan->tx_bd_offset = cpm_dpalloc(sizeof(cbd_t) * chan->conf.tx_bufnbr, 8); with rx_bufnbr == 8 and tx_bufnbr == 2 module_init SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160 SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a8 SCC2 rx_bd_offset=1c0 SCC2 tx_bd_offset=208 SCC3 rx_bd_offset=220 SCC3 tx_bd_offset=260 SCC4 rx_bd_offset=278 SCC4 tx_bd_offset=2c0 set_conf SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160 SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a4 -> ??? module_init SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160 SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a8 SCC2 rx_bd_offset=1c0 SCC2 tx_bd_offset=208 SCC3 rx_bd_offset=220 SCC3 tx_bd_offset=260 SCC4 rx_bd_offset=278 SCC4 tx_bd_offset=2c0 set_conf SCC2 rx_bd_offset=1c0 SCC2 tx_bd_offset=202 -> ??? module_init SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160 SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a8 SCC2 rx_bd_offset=1c0 SCC2 tx_bd_offset=208 SCC3 rx_bd_offset=220 SCC3 tx_bd_offset=260 SCC4 rx_bd_offset=278 SCC4 tx_bd_offset=2c0 set_conf SCC3 rx_bd_offset=220 SCC3 tx_bd_offset=260 -> ok module_init SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160 SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a8 SCC2 rx_bd_offset=1c0 SCC2 tx_bd_offset=208 SCC3 rx_bd_offset=220 SCC3 tx_bd_offset=260 SCC4 rx_bd_offset=278 SCC4 tx_bd_offset=2c0 set_conf SCC4 rx_bd_offset=278 SCC4 tx_bd_offset=2c0 -> ok WARNING : if I only uses the SCC1 port without allocating bds for the other ports, I can free and reallocate the bds for the SCC1 port as many times I want. module_init SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160 SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a8 set_conf SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160 SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a8 -> ok Really, I don't understand how this can arise. Any idea ? Thanks Laurent ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* RE: Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully r esolved
@ 2006-07-05 2:32 Li Yang-r58472
2006-07-05 8:25 ` Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved Laurent Lagrange
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Li Yang-r58472 @ 2006-07-05 2:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Laurent Lagrange, pantelis; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
Did you apply the alignment patch too? AFAIK, the problem is never fixed in
mainstream trees.
Best Regards,
Leo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: linuxppc-embedded-bounces+leoli=freescale.com@ozlabs.org
> [mailto:linuxppc-embedded-bounces+leoli=freescale.com@ozlabs.org] On Behalf
> Of Laurent Lagrange
> Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 11:37 PM
> To: pantelis@embeddedalley.com
> Cc: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
> Subject: Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved
>
>
> Hello Pantelis,
>
> Few months ago (25 January 2006), I sent a mail about an alignment bug in
> cpm_dpalloc.
> I applied and verified the provided patch. I was very satisfied with the
> result.
>
> Today I port a driver from Linux 2.4 to Linux 2.6 and I have strange
> results.
>
> The driver allocates rx and tx bds (8 bytes aligned) in the module_init for
> 4 SCC ports.
> That is always right. Then one port is opened by an application and a user
> configuration
> is set via an ioctl (set_conf).
>
> This ioctl first frees the old bds :
> cpm_dpfree(chan->rx_bd_offset);
> cpm_dpfree(chan->tx_bd_offset);
> then allocates the new ones :
> chan->rx_bd_offset = cpm_dpalloc(sizeof(cbd_t) * chan->conf.rx_bufnbr,
> 8);
> chan->tx_bd_offset = cpm_dpalloc(sizeof(cbd_t) * chan->conf.tx_bufnbr,
> 8);
> with rx_bufnbr == 8 and tx_bufnbr == 2
>
> module_init
> SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160
> SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a8
> SCC2 rx_bd_offset=1c0
> SCC2 tx_bd_offset=208
> SCC3 rx_bd_offset=220
> SCC3 tx_bd_offset=260
> SCC4 rx_bd_offset=278
> SCC4 tx_bd_offset=2c0
> set_conf
> SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160
> SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a4 -> ???
>
> module_init
> SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160
> SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a8
> SCC2 rx_bd_offset=1c0
> SCC2 tx_bd_offset=208
> SCC3 rx_bd_offset=220
> SCC3 tx_bd_offset=260
> SCC4 rx_bd_offset=278
> SCC4 tx_bd_offset=2c0
> set_conf
> SCC2 rx_bd_offset=1c0
> SCC2 tx_bd_offset=202 -> ???
>
> module_init
> SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160
> SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a8
> SCC2 rx_bd_offset=1c0
> SCC2 tx_bd_offset=208
> SCC3 rx_bd_offset=220
> SCC3 tx_bd_offset=260
> SCC4 rx_bd_offset=278
> SCC4 tx_bd_offset=2c0
> set_conf
> SCC3 rx_bd_offset=220
> SCC3 tx_bd_offset=260 -> ok
>
> module_init
> SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160
> SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a8
> SCC2 rx_bd_offset=1c0
> SCC2 tx_bd_offset=208
> SCC3 rx_bd_offset=220
> SCC3 tx_bd_offset=260
> SCC4 rx_bd_offset=278
> SCC4 tx_bd_offset=2c0
> set_conf
> SCC4 rx_bd_offset=278
> SCC4 tx_bd_offset=2c0 -> ok
>
> WARNING : if I only uses the SCC1 port without allocating bds for the other
> ports,
> I can free and reallocate the bds for the SCC1 port as many times I want.
>
> module_init
> SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160
> SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a8
> set_conf
> SCC1 rx_bd_offset=160
> SCC1 tx_bd_offset=1a8 -> ok
>
> Really, I don't understand how this can arise.
> Any idea ?
>
> Thanks
> Laurent
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
> Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* RE: Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved 2006-07-05 2:32 Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully r esolved Li Yang-r58472 @ 2006-07-05 8:25 ` Laurent Lagrange 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Laurent Lagrange @ 2006-07-05 8:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Li Yang-r58472', pantelis; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded Hi Leo, Thanks for the reply. The patch, I already applied, comes directly from Pantelis and is the same code as found at http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=3484 What do you mean by the alignment patch ? I suspect a problem in the cpm_dpfree function, not in the cpm_dpalloc function. I'll try to give more details. Best regards Laurent > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Li Yang-r58472 [mailto:LeoLi@freescale.com] > Envoyé : mer. 5 juillet 2006 03:32 > À : Laurent Lagrange; pantelis@embeddedalley.com > Cc : linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org > Objet : RE: Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully > resolved > > > Did you apply the alignment patch too? AFAIK, the problem is > never fixed in > mainstream trees. > > Best Regards, > Leo > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* RE: Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully r esolved @ 2006-07-05 8:35 Li Yang-r58472 2006-07-05 9:11 ` Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved Laurent Lagrange 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Li Yang-r58472 @ 2006-07-05 8:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Laurent Lagrange, pantelis; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded > -----Original Message----- > From: Laurent Lagrange [mailto:lagrange@fr.oleane.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 4:26 PM > To: Li Yang-r58472; pantelis@embeddedalley.com > Cc: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org > Subject: RE: Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not = fully resolved >=20 > Hi Leo, >=20 > Thanks for the reply. >=20 > The patch, I already applied, comes directly from Pantelis > and is the same code as found at > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=3D3484 Sure, it is the patch I mentioned. Also be noted that the patch only = fixes rheap in arch/ppc/. If you are using latest 2.6 source, you are = most probably using code under arch/powerpc/. >=20 > What do you mean by the alignment patch ? >=20 > I suspect a problem in the cpm_dpfree function, > not in the cpm_dpalloc function. >=20 > I'll try to give more details. >=20 > Best regards > Laurent >=20 >=20 >=20 > > -----Message d'origine----- > > De : Li Yang-r58472 [mailto:LeoLi@freescale.com] > > Envoy=E9 : mer. 5 juillet 2006 03:32 > > =C0 : Laurent Lagrange; pantelis@embeddedalley.com > > Cc : linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org > > Objet : RE: Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not = fully > > resolved > > > > > > Did you apply the alignment patch too? AFAIK, the problem is > > never fixed in > > mainstream trees. > > > > Best Regards, > > Leo > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* RE: Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved 2006-07-05 8:35 Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully r esolved Li Yang-r58472 @ 2006-07-05 9:11 ` Laurent Lagrange 2006-07-05 9:38 ` Pantelis Antoniou 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Laurent Lagrange @ 2006-07-05 9:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Li Yang-r58472', pantelis; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Li Yang-r58472 [mailto:LeoLi@freescale.com] > Envoyé : mer. 5 juillet 2006 09:36 > À : Laurent Lagrange; pantelis@embeddedalley.com > > > > The patch, I already applied, comes directly from Pantelis > > and is the same code as found at > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=3484 > > Sure, it is the patch I mentioned. Also be noted that the > patch only fixes rheap in arch/ppc/. If you are using latest > 2.6 source, you are most probably using code under arch/powerpc/. > > I use a Linux 2.6.9 for MPC8260 and the arch/ppc/lib/rheap.c file. I have no arch/powerpc tree in this kernel. Before applying the patch, I was not able to get a right aligned area with cpm_dpalloc. After applying it, cpm_dpalloc seems to be right until I use cpm_dpfree and then cpm_dpalloc on the same area. Another idea ? Thanks Laurent ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved 2006-07-05 9:11 ` Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved Laurent Lagrange @ 2006-07-05 9:38 ` Pantelis Antoniou 2006-07-05 10:03 ` Laurent Lagrange 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Pantelis Antoniou @ 2006-07-05 9:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Laurent Lagrange; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded On Wednesday 05 July 2006 12:11, Laurent Lagrange wrote: >=20 > > -----Message d'origine----- > > De : Li Yang-r58472 [mailto:LeoLi@freescale.com] > > Envoy=E9 : mer. 5 juillet 2006 09:36 > > =C0 : Laurent Lagrange; pantelis@embeddedalley.com > > > > > > The patch, I already applied, comes directly from Pantelis > > > and is the same code as found at > > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=3D3484 > > > > Sure, it is the patch I mentioned. Also be noted that the > > patch only fixes rheap in arch/ppc/. If you are using latest > > 2.6 source, you are most probably using code under arch/powerpc/. > > > > I use a Linux 2.6.9 for MPC8260 and the arch/ppc/lib/rheap.c file. > I have no arch/powerpc tree in this kernel. >=20 > Before applying the patch, I was not able to get a right aligned area > with cpm_dpalloc. After applying it, cpm_dpalloc seems to be right > until I use cpm_dpfree and then cpm_dpalloc on the same area. >=20 > Another idea ? > Thanks > Laurent >=20 >=20 >=20 Should be a bug at the free. I'll take a look at it when I have a few spare cycles. Pantelis ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* RE: Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved 2006-07-05 9:38 ` Pantelis Antoniou @ 2006-07-05 10:03 ` Laurent Lagrange 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Laurent Lagrange @ 2006-07-05 10:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Pantelis Antoniou'; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Pantelis Antoniou [mailto:pantelis@embeddedalley.com] > Envoyé : mer. 5 juillet 2006 10:38 > À : Laurent Lagrange > Cc : 'Li Yang-r58472'; linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org > Objet : Re: Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully > resolved > > Should be a bug at the free. I'll take a look at it when I have a few > spare cycles. > > Pantelis > Yes, I think so. I'll try to get more details if I can help you. Best regards Laurent ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-07-05 10:02 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2006-01-25 13:48 Misunderstanding with function cpm_dpalloc in Linux 2.6.x Laurent Lagrange 2006-01-25 16:14 ` Pantelis Antoniou 2006-07-04 15:37 ` Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved Laurent Lagrange -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2006-07-05 2:32 Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully r esolved Li Yang-r58472 2006-07-05 8:25 ` Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved Laurent Lagrange 2006-07-05 8:35 Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully r esolved Li Yang-r58472 2006-07-05 9:11 ` Linux 2.6.x : cpm_dpalloc alignment bug perhaps not fully resolved Laurent Lagrange 2006-07-05 9:38 ` Pantelis Antoniou 2006-07-05 10:03 ` Laurent Lagrange
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).