From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Albert ARIBAUD Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:34:45 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: enable unaligned access on ARMv7 In-Reply-To: References: <1338918451-10126-1-git-send-email-dev@lynxeye.de> <4FCE52FB.3020501@wwwdotorg.org> <1338923180.1377.2.camel@tellur> <20120622111501.21e1fdcc@aari01-12> <1340357816.1381.21.camel@tellur> <20120622131654.2c694a82@aari01-12> <1340365637.1381.38.camel@tellur> <4FE4ED98.2030103@ti.com> <4FE4EE13.7040206@ti.com> <20120623110113.511091c8@lilith> Message-ID: <20120625223445.257fef5c@lilith> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Aneesh, > >> BTW, I agree that enabling un-aligned access is not a bad idea. > > > > Just being "not a bad idea" is not enough for me to accept this. It > > will have to be the sole sound solution to a problem, and at this > > point, I do not think it is as far as USB structure mis-alignement > > issues are concerned. > > My point is that enabling un-aligned accesses in itsown merit > is not a bad idea, not as a solution to this problem. I have seen > it being enabled in HLOS environment. TI's Symbian port for > instance had it enabled for OMAP3. I don't > know why Linux too shoudln't take advantage of such hw > features. Perhaps you don't want to take it at this point of time to > force the real solution to the USB problem, which is reasonable. What is the (non-contrived) problem to which allowing mis-aligned accesses would be a solution? Amicalement, -- Albert.