Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: update for .39

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 00:32 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 
> > > It should work, but it hurts my eyes to see the source code forcing a 64-bit
> > > word to 32-bit alignment.
> > 
> > We solved such stuff with macros in other places already.
> > 
> > #ifdef 64bit
> > # define BLA 8
> > #else
> > # define BLA 4
> > #endif
> > 
> > and then use 
> > 
> > .aling BLA
> > 
> > Where is the problem?
> 
> That's basically the solution that Jason came up with, and what I
> expected. What caught my eye was that David Miller had .align 4 for this
> on sparc which is the one arch that is truly picky about such things. As
> I understood more about this, I see that would work for both archs.

I doubt that sparc will barf when we make this 64/32bit aware. If it
does, we have some bigger fish to fry.
 
> That doesn't mean I'm against the .align BLA solution.

As hpa pointed out in some unreadable mail, we have _ASM_ALIGN on x86
already exactly for this purpose.

Thanks,

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