summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/Documentation/arm/mem_alignment
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorSrikant Patnaik2015-01-11 12:28:04 +0530
committerSrikant Patnaik2015-01-11 12:28:04 +0530
commit871480933a1c28f8a9fed4c4d34d06c439a7a422 (patch)
tree8718f573808810c2a1e8cb8fb6ac469093ca2784 /Documentation/arm/mem_alignment
parent9d40ac5867b9aefe0722bc1f110b965ff294d30d (diff)
downloadFOSSEE-netbook-kernel-source-871480933a1c28f8a9fed4c4d34d06c439a7a422.tar.gz
FOSSEE-netbook-kernel-source-871480933a1c28f8a9fed4c4d34d06c439a7a422.tar.bz2
FOSSEE-netbook-kernel-source-871480933a1c28f8a9fed4c4d34d06c439a7a422.zip
Moved, renamed, and deleted files
The original directory structure was scattered and unorganized. Changes are basically to make it look like kernel structure.
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/arm/mem_alignment')
-rw-r--r--Documentation/arm/mem_alignment58
1 files changed, 58 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/arm/mem_alignment b/Documentation/arm/mem_alignment
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..c7c7a114
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/arm/mem_alignment
@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+Too many problems poped up because of unnoticed misaligned memory access in
+kernel code lately. Therefore the alignment fixup is now unconditionally
+configured in for SA11x0 based targets. According to Alan Cox, this is a
+bad idea to configure it out, but Russell King has some good reasons for
+doing so on some f***ed up ARM architectures like the EBSA110. However
+this is not the case on many design I'm aware of, like all SA11x0 based
+ones.
+
+Of course this is a bad idea to rely on the alignment trap to perform
+unaligned memory access in general. If those access are predictable, you
+are better to use the macros provided by include/asm/unaligned.h. The
+alignment trap can fixup misaligned access for the exception cases, but at
+a high performance cost. It better be rare.
+
+Now for user space applications, it is possible to configure the alignment
+trap to SIGBUS any code performing unaligned access (good for debugging bad
+code), or even fixup the access by software like for kernel code. The later
+mode isn't recommended for performance reasons (just think about the
+floating point emulation that works about the same way). Fix your code
+instead!
+
+Please note that randomly changing the behaviour without good thought is
+real bad - it changes the behaviour of all unaligned instructions in user
+space, and might cause programs to fail unexpectedly.
+
+To change the alignment trap behavior, simply echo a number into
+/proc/cpu/alignment. The number is made up from various bits:
+
+bit behavior when set
+--- -----------------
+
+0 A user process performing an unaligned memory access
+ will cause the kernel to print a message indicating
+ process name, pid, pc, instruction, address, and the
+ fault code.
+
+1 The kernel will attempt to fix up the user process
+ performing the unaligned access. This is of course
+ slow (think about the floating point emulator) and
+ not recommended for production use.
+
+2 The kernel will send a SIGBUS signal to the user process
+ performing the unaligned access.
+
+Note that not all combinations are supported - only values 0 through 5.
+(6 and 7 don't make sense).
+
+For example, the following will turn on the warnings, but without
+fixing up or sending SIGBUS signals:
+
+ echo 1 > /proc/sys/debug/alignment
+
+You can also read the content of the same file to get statistical
+information on unaligned access occurrences plus the current mode of
+operation for user space code.
+
+
+Nicolas Pitre, Mar 13, 2001. Modified Russell King, Nov 30, 2001.