Dear Albert
Am 23.05.2011 11:49, schrieb Albert ARIBAUD:
Le 23/05/2011 11:30, Alexander Holler a écrit :
Am 23.05.2011 11:06, schrieb Matthias Weisser:
In some cases (e.g. bootm with a elf payload which is already at the right position) there is a in place copy of data to the same address. Catching this saves some ms while booting.
Signed-off-by: Matthias Weisserweisserm@arcor.de
arch/arm/lib/memcpy.S | 3 +++ 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/memcpy.S b/arch/arm/lib/memcpy.S index 3b5aeec..f655256 100644 --- a/arch/arm/lib/memcpy.S +++ b/arch/arm/lib/memcpy.S @@ -60,6 +60,9 @@ .globl memcpy memcpy:
cmp r0, r1moveq pc, lrenter r4, lr subs r2, r2, #4The standard clearly say to both memory regions should not overlap when memcpy() is used, so I would say this is the wrong place to fix that.
I think the intent here is not to enforce the standard but to handle an actual, and degenerate, copy request in the most efficient manner, and in that respect, the patch does its job.
Can this patch go in or do I need to change anything? I really would like to see it in mainline.
Regards, Matthias