[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FDA3BB4.9040607@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 13:29:56 -0600
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
CC: swarren@...dia.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
haojian.zhuang@...il.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
jic23@....ac.uk, kay@...y.org
Subject: Re: Follow-up to remaining issue with alignment of __log_buf in printk.c
On 06/14/2012 01:19 PM, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
>
> Hi Stephen and others,
>
> I have a XScale PXA based board with has the alignement issue which makes the
> kernel trap during its early stage.
>
> I wonder what is the status now, is there a fix available ?
>
> I have tracked what happens on PXA. The pxa is an ARM v5TE chip. The new printk
> version you submitted is translated to the following assembly on the line :
> msg->ts_nsec = local_clock();
> Into:
> => 0xc001bbe0 <log_store+496>: strd r0, [r4, r5]
>
> In ARMv5, the "strd" assembly opcode expects the address to be 64bits aligned,
> hence the bug.
>
> Now the solutions I have seen so far in the mailing lists :
> - #define LOG_ALIGN (__alignof__(u64))
> Does always work.
> - #define LOG_ALIGN (__alignof__(struct log))
> Doesn't work with my toolchain, as __alignof__(struct log) is 4, not 8
Isn't that a bug in the toolchain; isn't the alignment of a struct
required to be the greatest alignment of any of its members? Otherwise,
this problem could arise with any usage of that struct.
I suppose this could be worked around with something like:
#define LOG_ALIGN max(__alignof__(struct log), __alignof__(u64))
--
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