[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7bc6b5af-85e0-5b06-f979-368b8b840a16@akamai.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 10:30:50 -0500
From: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
To: David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Sachin Sant <sachinp@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...lanox.com>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Zhigang Lu <zlu@...hip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] module: set __jump_table alignment to 8
On 03/01/2017 05:04 PM, David Daney wrote:
> For powerpc the __jump_table section in modules is not aligned, this
> causes a WARN_ON() splat when loading a module containing a __jump_table.
>
> Strict alignment became necessary with commit 3821fd35b58d
> ("jump_label: Reduce the size of struct static_key"), currently in
> linux-next, which uses the two least significant bits of pointers to
> __jump_table elements.
>
> Fix by forcing __jump_table to 8, which is the same alignment used for
> this section in the kernel proper.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>
> Tested-by: Sachin Sant <sachinp@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
Thanks,
-Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists