Holger Fischer
2013-May-22 05:08 UTC
btrfs-tools: debian/patches/09-unaligned-memaccess.patch
Dear BTRFS-Community, attached is a patch that probably could be applied upstream: It is ... Fixing unaligned memory accesses ... Details to this patch could be read under http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=656955 I rechecked against latest git. As far as I can see, it''s not applied yet. Best Regards Holger Fischer
David Sterba
2013-May-24 10:52 UTC
Re: btrfs-tools: debian/patches/09-unaligned-memaccess.patch
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 07:08:42AM +0200, Holger Fischer wrote:> Dear BTRFS-Community, > attached is a patch that probably could be applied upstream: > It is ... Fixing unaligned memory accesses ... > Details to this patch could be read under > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=656955 > > I rechecked against latest git. > As far as I can see, it''s not applied yet.I had been applied, but had to be updated further, see https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs.git/commit/?id=7b668965f0cf3fb8632c505a7a011189ee1a5a8e " Replacing memcpy with memmove does''t work - gcc treats memmove the same way it treats memcpy. This patch brings in {get|put}_unaligned_le{16|32|64} (using the packed struct method), and uses them in the failing get/set calls. On architectures where unaligned accesses are cheap, these unaligned macros should be optimized out by the compiler. " What''s still missing is get_unaligned_* in the BTRFS_SETGET_STACK_FUNCS macros. david -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html