On Thu, 2008-04-10 at 23:18 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
quoted text
> On Thu, 2008-04-10 at 13:49 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Harvey Harrison wrote:
> > >
> > > Shift of a le value seems strange, probably meant to shift the cpu-order
> > > variable as in the prvious section of the switch statement.
> > 
> > Hmm. This patch looks ObviouslyCorrect(tm), but it worries me that 
> > apparently the old broken code has been around since last July, and afaik 
> > it can never have worked on big-endian machines.
> > 
> > So did nobody ever use it, or why hasn't this ever triggered? How did you 
> > find this? A sparse warning?
> 
> The heaviest users of the lzo code I know of are little-endian ARM
> devices through jffs2. When the code was merged there was a lot of
> discussion about the best way to handle the endian issues and unaligned
> accesses and whilst I seem to remember someone posting big-endian test
> results it could have been before some of the later changes were made.
> 
> So yes its possible its not been run on BE until now or that isn't a
> common code path. I've checked this against the external LZO library its
> based on and the patch is correct
> 
> Acked-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@rpsys.net>
> 

This is one of the reasons I thought about for adding the new api, the
bracketing is just too easy to get wrong when you throw
get/put_unaligned into the mix.

Harvey

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/