[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201102140934.17671.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 09:34:17 +1030
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...are.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
"Linux/m68k" <linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org>,
"Linux-Arch" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] module: deal with alignment issues in built-in module parameters
On Sat, 12 Feb 2011 08:33:56 am Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> >From 03f1332fc02af7af0d06ab409e3ec72107637845 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...are.com>
> Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 13:47:20 -0800
> Subject: [PATCH] module: deal with alignment issues in built-in module parameters
>
> As DaveM said, we can't reliably put structures into independent
> objects, put them into a special section, and then expect array
> access over them (via the section boundaries) after linking the
> objects together to just "work" due to variable alignment choices
> in different situations. The only solution that seems to work
> reliably is to make an array of plain pointers to the objects in
> question and put those pointers in the special section.
I've applied this, but won't put it to linux-next. I'll let it stew for
a bit longer unless someone actually reports a problem with the current
code.
Thanks,
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists