From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Will Newton <will.newton@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, stable@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] include/linux/unaligned: Pack the whole struct rather than just the field.
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 21:44:45 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101220214445.85816469.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=kX8NraxuLn-f=s=nqja71Ayq2kYwgG6gq+7YF@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 22:11:53 +0000 Will Newton <will.newton@gmail.com> wrote:
> The current packed struct implementation of unaligned access adds
> the packed attribute only to the field within the unaligned struct
> rather than to the struct as a whole. This is not sufficient to
> enforce proper behaviour on architectures with a default struct
> alignment of more than one byte.
>
> For example, the current implementation of __get_unaligned_cpu16
> when compiled for arm with gcc -O1 -mstructure-size-boundary=32
> assumes the struct is on a 4 byte boundary so performs the load
> of the 16bit packed field as if it were on a 4 byte boundary:
>
> __get_unaligned_cpu16:
> ldrh r0, [r0, #0]
> bx lr
>
> Moving the packed attribute to the struct rather than the field
> causes the proper unaligned access code to be generated:
>
> __get_unaligned_cpu16:
> ldrb r3, [r0, #0] @ zero_extendqisi2
> ldrb r0, [r0, #1] @ zero_extendqisi2
> orr r0, r3, r0, asl #8
> bx lr
>
> Signed-off-by: Will Newton <will.newton@gmail.com>
> ---
> include/linux/unaligned/packed_struct.h | 6 +++---
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/unaligned/packed_struct.h
> b/include/linux/unaligned/packed_struct.h
> index 2498bb9..c9a6abd 100644
> --- a/include/linux/unaligned/packed_struct.h
> +++ b/include/linux/unaligned/packed_struct.h
> @@ -3,9 +3,9 @@
>
> #include <linux/kernel.h>
>
> -struct __una_u16 { u16 x __attribute__((packed)); };
> -struct __una_u32 { u32 x __attribute__((packed)); };
> -struct __una_u64 { u64 x __attribute__((packed)); };
> +struct __una_u16 { u16 x; } __attribute__((packed));
> +struct __una_u32 { u32 x; } __attribute__((packed));
> +struct __una_u64 { u64 x; } __attribute__((packed));
>
Yes, that was wrong.
Do you think this bug affects 2.6.36 or earlier?
Even if it doesn't, it looks like a bit of a hand-grenade to leave it
unfixed in earlier kernels.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-21 5:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-01 22:11 Will Newton
2010-12-07 11:12 ` Will Newton
2010-12-18 12:59 ` Will Newton
2010-12-21 5:44 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2010-12-21 10:43 ` Will Newton
2010-12-21 23:36 ` Harvey Harrison
2010-12-22 10:34 ` Will Newton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20101220214445.85816469.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@kernel.org \
--cc=will.newton@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome