Thread (32 messages) 32 messages, 9 authors, 2007-06-16

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

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
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help