Re: [uClinux-dev] [PATCH] m68knommu: allow ColdFire CPUs to use unaligned accesses

2012-06-19 Thread Greg Ungerer
On 06/08/2012 05:19 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 7:43 AM, wrote: From: Greg Ungerer All current ColdFire CPUs are able to support unaligned memory accesses. So remove the CONFIG_CPU_HAS_NO_UNALIGNED option selection for ColdFire. It seems that the current restriction w

Re: [uClinux-dev] [PATCH] m68knommu: allow ColdFire CPUs to use unaligned accesses

2012-06-12 Thread Greg Ungerer
On 13/06/12 06:27, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Philippe De Muyter wrote: On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:25:44PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: On 08/06/12 23:35, Philippe De Muyter wrote: ... I mentionned that only to make you able to soften the commit comment :) Ok

Re: [uClinux-dev] [PATCH] m68knommu: allow ColdFire CPUs to use unaligned accesses

2012-06-12 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Philippe De Muyter wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:25:44PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: >> On 08/06/12 23:35, Philippe De Muyter wrote: > ... >>> >>> I mentionned that only to make you able to soften the commit comment :) >> >> Ok, makes sense. I should probably

Re: [uClinux-dev] [PATCH] m68knommu: allow ColdFire CPUs to use unaligned accesses

2012-06-12 Thread Philippe De Muyter
Hi Greg, On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:25:44PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: > Hi Philippe, > > On 08/06/12 23:35, Philippe De Muyter wrote: ... >> >> I mentionned that only to make you able to soften the commit comment :) > > Ok, makes sense. I should probably have mentioned that this means > the ColdF

Re: [uClinux-dev] [PATCH] m68knommu: allow ColdFire CPUs to use unaligned accesses

2012-06-11 Thread Greg Ungerer
Hi Philippe, On 08/06/12 23:35, Philippe De Muyter wrote: On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 10:19:43PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: Hi Philippe, On 06/08/2012 08:39 PM, Philippe De Muyter wrote: On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:43:00PM +1000, g...@snapgear.com wrote: From: Greg Ungerer All current ColdFire C

Re: [uClinux-dev] [PATCH] m68knommu: allow ColdFire CPUs to use unaligned accesses

2012-06-08 Thread Philippe De Muyter
Hi Greg, On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 10:19:43PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: > Hi Philippe, > > On 06/08/2012 08:39 PM, Philippe De Muyter wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:43:00PM +1000, g...@snapgear.com wrote: >>> From: Greg Ungerer >>> >>> All current ColdFire CPUs are able to support unaligned m

Re: [uClinux-dev] [PATCH] m68knommu: allow ColdFire CPUs to use unaligned accesses

2012-06-08 Thread Greg Ungerer
Hi Philippe, On 06/08/2012 08:39 PM, Philippe De Muyter wrote: On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:43:00PM +1000, g...@snapgear.com wrote: From: Greg Ungerer All current ColdFire CPUs are able to support unaligned memory accesses. So remove the CONFIG_CPU_HAS_NO_UNALIGNED option selection for ColdFire.

Re: [uClinux-dev] [PATCH] m68knommu: allow ColdFire CPUs to use unaligned accesses

2012-06-08 Thread Philippe De Muyter
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:43:00PM +1000, g...@snapgear.com wrote: > From: Greg Ungerer > > All current ColdFire CPUs are able to support unaligned memory accesses. > So remove the CONFIG_CPU_HAS_NO_UNALIGNED option selection for ColdFire. > > It seems that the current restriction was inherrited

Re: [uClinux-dev] [PATCH] m68knommu: allow ColdFire CPUs to use unaligned accesses

2012-06-08 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 7:43 AM, wrote: > From: Greg Ungerer > > All current ColdFire CPUs are able to support unaligned memory accesses. > So remove the CONFIG_CPU_HAS_NO_UNALIGNED option selection for ColdFire. > > It seems that the current restriction was inherrited from the early non-MMU > su

[uClinux-dev] [PATCH] m68knommu: allow ColdFire CPUs to use unaligned accesses

2012-06-07 Thread gerg
From: Greg Ungerer All current ColdFire CPUs are able to support unaligned memory accesses. So remove the CONFIG_CPU_HAS_NO_UNALIGNED option selection for ColdFire. It seems that the current restriction was inherrited from the early non-MMU support for the basic 68000 proecssors - which do not s