Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] lib: lz4: cleanup unaligned access efficiency detection

[Sergey Senozhatsky]

On (04/09/16 22:05), Rui Salvaterra wrote:
> These identifiers are bogus. The interested architectures should define
> HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS whenever relevant to do so. If this
> isn't true for some arch, it should be fixed in the arch definition.

yes, besides ARM_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS exists only in lib/lz4/lz4defs.h

> Signed-off-by: Rui Salvaterra <rsalvaterra@xxxxxxxxx>

Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxx>


	-ss

> ---
>  lib/lz4/lz4defs.h | 4 +---
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h b/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
> index 0710a62..c79d7ea 100644
> --- a/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
> +++ b/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
> @@ -24,9 +24,7 @@
>  typedef struct _U16_S { u16 v; } U16_S;
>  typedef struct _U32_S { u32 v; } U32_S;
>  typedef struct _U64_S { u64 v; } U64_S;
> -#if defined(CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS)		\
> -	|| defined(CONFIG_ARM) && __LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ >= 6	\
> -	&& defined(ARM_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS)
> +#if defined(CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS)
>  
>  #define A16(x) (((U16_S *)(x))->v)
>  #define A32(x) (((U32_S *)(x))->v)
> -- 
> 2.7.4
>