From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Mack <daniel@caiaq.de>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 21:23:31 +0200
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] ARM: add unaligned macros
In-Reply-To: <20090604190347.5F003832E416@gemini.denx.de>
References: <1244111241-32735-1-git-send-email-daniel@caiaq.de>
	<1244111241-32735-2-git-send-email-daniel@caiaq.de>
	<1244111241-32735-3-git-send-email-daniel@caiaq.de>
	<1244111241-32735-4-git-send-email-daniel@caiaq.de>
	<20090604174208.GM26688@buzzloop.caiaq.de>
	<20090604190347.5F003832E416@gemini.denx.de>
Message-ID: <20090604192331.GO26688@buzzloop.caiaq.de>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 09:03:47PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > +static inline u16 get_unaligned_le16(const void *p)
> > +{
> > +	return __get_unaligned_cpu16((const u8 *)p);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline u32 get_unaligned_le32(const void *p)
> > +{
> > +	return __get_unaligned_cpu32((const u8 *)p);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline u64 get_unaligned_le64(const void *p)
> > +{
> > +	return __get_unaligned_cpu64((const u8 *)p);
> > +}
> 
> Are these 3 really all "u8" pointers, or is this a copy & paste error?

Yes, this is how it came from the Linux kernel and my tests show that
these access methods work well.

> Is there any guarantee that such macros are never used on device
> registers and the like?

Well - how can I guarantee that? Anyway - the functions can be enhanced
later to make them work with different types of memories. For now, they
implement a working set of functions to allow ubifs (and probably other
code as well) to be compiled and ran on ARMs.

Daniel