Hi Albert,
On 08.10.2012 16:36, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
Hi Andreas,
On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:21:45 +0200, "Andreas Bießmann" andreas.devel@googlemail.com wrote:
Dear Albert Aribaud,
On 05.10.2012 21:15, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
Under option -munaligned-access, gcc can perform local char or 16-bit array initializations using misaligned native accesses which will throw a data abort exception. Fix files where these array initializations were unneeded, and for files known to contain such initializations, enforce gcc option -mno-unaligned-access.
Signed-off-by: Albert ARIBAUD albert.u.boot@aribaud.net
V2: fix incorrect doc file name in dabort handler message
well, I can not see any change regarding the doc file ;)
Maybe you though there was a change in the doc file itself? V2 is about correcting the file *name* as printed out by the dabort handler.
Well, that was I understood by the V2 comment ...
but V1 has: ---8<--- - printf ("data abort\n"); + printf ("data abort\n\n MAYBE you should read doc/README.unaligned-access\n\n"); --->8---
and V2 has: ---8<--- - printf ("data abort\n"); + printf ("data abort\n\n MAYBE you should read doc/README.unaligned-accesses\n\n"); --->8---
However the filename is 'doc/README.arm-unaligned-accesses'
<snip>
+Considering the rarity of actual occurrences (as of this writing, 5 +files out of 7840 in U-Boot, or .3%, contain an initialized local char +array which cannot actually be replaced with a const char*), detection +if the issue in patches should not be asked from contributors.
---8<--- Considering the rarity of actual occurrences, detection if the issue in patches should not be asked from contributors. --->8---
I think there is something wrong wih this sentence ... albeit I can not definitely say what it is.
s/if/of/, but yes, the sentence could use some rewriting. "Considering that actual occurrences of the issue are rare, contributors should not be required to systematically try and detect the issue in their patches". Would that be ok?
Sounds way better.
+Detecting files susceptible to the issue can be automated through a +filter installed as a hook in .git which recognizes local char array +initializations. Automation should err on the false positive side, for +instance flagging non-local arrays as if they were local if they cannot +be told apart.
Isn't that a suggestion that should be asked to the list instead? I wonder why it is written down in this README document.
Not sure I understand what you mean about "ask[ing] the list instead".
I meant to discuss this on the list and just install the hook then (at least for the denx.de repositories).
As for writing it down, I did because it's better written down than forgotten, and at this point there is no proper way to auto install a git hook in a U-Boot developer's tree, at least none that I would feel safe pushing so close to a release. So even if I did provide a script, each developer would have to manually put the hook in place. Therefore, the doc just says how to automate detection.
But you are right, so forget my comment.
best regards
Andreas Bießmann