On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 21:02 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > On Wed, 19 May 2010 12:40:36 +0100 > David Woodhouse <dw...@infradead.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 13:32 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > Instead of having (different) defaults in sl[aou]b, perhaps we should > > > just remove the defaults completely, to ensure all architectures set > > > ARCH_SLAB_MINALIGN to the correct value? > > > > What is 'correct'? The architecture sets it to the minimum value that it > > can cope with, according to its own alignment constraints (and DMA/cache > > constraints, in the case of ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN). > > IIRC, not all the architectures do that; ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN doesn't > mean "DMA-safe" alignment currently.
Surely those architectures that have alignment constraints for DMA but which don't set ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN are just buggy -- it _does_ mean that. -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre david.woodho...@intel.com Intel Corporation -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
