Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 10:58:15 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: Peter Grehan <grehan@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, Andrew Thompson <thompsa@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/amd64/include _types.h src/sys/i386/include _types.h src/sys/net if_bridge.c src/sys/netinet ip_var.h src/sys/netinet6 ip6_var.h Message-ID: <20050704105721.Y2768@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <42C90419.8070509@freebsd.org> References: <200507022313.j62NDWYC028248@repoman.freebsd.org> <42C90419.8070509@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Peter Grehan wrote: >> Check the alignment of the IP header before passing the packet up to the >> packet filter. This would cause a panic on architectures that require >> strict >> alignment such as sparc64 (tier1) and ia64/ppc (tier2). > > FYI, any modern ppc implementation doesn't require strict alignment for > integer load/stores though there's a performance penalty for having to > split the access into smaller ones. While it's not immediately relevant to the IP code, generally speaking, is it the case that non-aligned integer reads can be non-atomic with respect to other CPUs due to the multiple access implementation? Robert N M Watson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050704105721.Y2768>