[U-Boot] [PATCH 01/10] Fix IP alignement problem

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 17:11 Wed 15 Oct     , Olav Morken wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 07:07, Ben Warren <biggerbadderben at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Olav,
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Olav Morken <olavmrk at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Ben Warren <biggerbadderben at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > What other architectures have you tried this on?
> >>
> >> None, as we don't have any other boards to test on. I do however believe
> >> that this change should have no side-effects. If any architectures
> >> relied on this function working as some sort of memory/io barrier, they
> >> would have problems with other functions such as ArpRequest, which
> >> doesn't have anything that will work as a memory/io barrier before the
> >> eth_send function.
> >>
> >> Of course, I could be wrong. I would certainly not suggest including
> >> this change without some more testing.
> >>
> >> The bug which causes this problem is in avr32-gcc, which makes
> >> assumptions about the alignement of IP_t when using volatile, and this
> >> change shouldn't be necessary once that bug is fixed. Until that bug
> >> is fixed, this change is needed for anyone trying to run U-Boot on
> >> this microcontroller.
> >
> > I don't mean to be a pain, it's just that this code is shared by everything,
> > so we need to be really careful.  I agree with Haavard that the volatile
> > keyword is probably used much more than it should be in the networking
> > library.
> >
> > I'll pull this into the net/testing branch in the next couple of days, and
> > hopefully we'll get some volunteers to try it out on different
> > architectures.
> 
> That is great.
> 
> FWIW: I have now tested it in qemu_mips, where it appears to work. (Had
> to revert "qemu-mips.h: Add CFI support" before I could test it.)
why?

Best Regards,
J.