John Baldwin wrote:
Also note that this will play hell with some of the recent
copy avoidance changes made by Bill Paul to the ethernet
drivers, to avoid the expense of copying the packet, with
the knowledge that there would be an increased overhead in
the resulting packet field
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A shakedown cruise could end up being very rough... you
would effectively need to check an unaligned access in
kernel is OK flag in many of these instances, and fall back
to doing the copy when it was false.
...therefore - never mind.
Perhaps some app code may
On 19-Jul-01 Terry Lambert wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A shakedown cruise could end up being very rough... you
would effectively need to check an unaligned access in
kernel is OK flag in many of these instances, and fall back
to doing the copy when it was false.
...therefore -
It is very rare that the alpha port is broken as you describe. Sometimes
a bug will have a different affect on the alpha than on x86, but except
for bugs in sys/alpha that x86'ers won't be committing, very few of the bugs
break just the alpha and not the x86 as well.
Generally this is
Matthew Jacob writes:
Actually, to be fair, we'd have to consider all the kernel subsystems that
have *not* in fact been tested on alpha. The dozens of warnings from NetGraph
or CODA code indicate that there might be problems there, for instance.
NetGraph certainly has some 32-bit
Cool. Thanks. I'll rip it out of modules builds for alpha then- it'll save
some time in kernel rebuilds.
On 19 Jul 2001, Sudish Joseph wrote:
Matthew Jacob writes:
Actually, to be fair, we'd have to consider all the kernel subsystems that
have *not* in fact been tested on alpha. The
John Baldwin wrote:
Actually, since the 486, it's been possible for us to turn on unaligned
access exceptions on the x86. We should probably consider doing this, to
ensure better performance, and to avoid the unnecessary bus overhead we
eat for unaligned access today... not to mention
On 18-Jul-01 Terry Lambert wrote:
John Baldwin wrote:
It's the AC bit in eflags.
Note that this will not trap 64 bit unaligned accesses, only 32.
And only at pl 3...
Also note that this will play hell with some of the recent
copy avoidance changes made by Bill Paul to the ethernet
On 18-Jul-01 Terry Lambert wrote:
John Baldwin wrote:
Actually, since the 486, it's been possible for us to turn on unaligned
access exceptions on the x86. We should probably consider doing this, to
ensure better performance, and to avoid the unnecessary bus overhead we
eat for
On 17-Jul-01 Matthew Jacob wrote:
Actually, since the 486, it's been possible for us to turn on unaligned
access exceptions on the x86. We should probably consider doing this, to
ensure better performance, and to avoid the unnecessary bus overhead we
eat for unaligned access today...
10 matches
Mail list logo
