> And debug simulators that can be made to trap such accesses, and in most > cases processors which fault such an access (so you find it) but don't > provide enough information to restart. > > The testing isn't that hard for a given embedded system and having done > work Linux does not need other changes re-breaking things.
Hopefully everybody who deploys these systems knows this. It seems like a open death trap to me, especially since the consequences are so severe: remote packet of death, could be a recall for a network conntected embedded device that doesn't easily allow firmware update. And they would rightfully blame Linux. It would be much safer if the parts of the stack that weren't audited/tested were marked this way and check for BROKEN_UNALIGNED or similar. Also frankly I'm surprised that whoever designed these systems didn't learn from the old M68000 who made this mistake the first time. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/