Re: [PATCH] Introduce compat_u64 and compat_s64 types
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Date: 2007-06-15 12:01:16
Also in:
lkml
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Date: 2007-06-15 12:01:16
Also in:
lkml
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 13:55 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Friday 15 June 2007 11:31:37 Arnd Bergmann wrote:quoted
One common problem with 32 bit system call and ioctl emulation is the different alignment rules between i386 and 64 bit machines. A number of drivers work around this by marking the compat structures as 'attribute((packed))', which is not the right solution because it breaks all the non-x86 architectures that want to use the same compat code.Why does it break them? It should just make them a little slower. The network code requires unaligned accesses to work anyways so if your architecture doesn't support them it is already remotely crashable.
alignof(uint64_t) is 8 on just about every 32-bit architecture except i386. Using __attribute__((packed)) for the 32-on-64 compat code is thus wrong on every 64-bit architecture except x86_64 and ia64. It's the _location_ which is wrong; the handling of unaligned loads is irrelevant (and Linux actually supports a bunch of architecture on which fixups are impossible now, btw). -- dwmw2