[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180709130738.GA28336@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2018 14:07:39 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] atomic{64}_t: Explicitly specify data storage length and
alignment
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 03:47:41PM +0300, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> Atomic instructions require data they operate on to be aligned
> according to data size. I.e. 32-bit atomic values must be 32-bit
> aligned while 64-bit values must be 64-bit aligned.
>
> Otherwise even if CPU may handle not-aligend normal data access,
> still atomic instructions fail and typically raise an exception
> leaving us dead in the water.
>
> This came-up during lengthly discussion here:
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-snps-arc/2018-July/004022.html
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin@...opsys.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
> Cc: Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
> Cc: Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>
> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
> Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
> Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
> Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> ---
> arch/arm/include/asm/atomic.h | 2 +-
> include/asm-generic/atomic64.h | 2 +-
> include/linux/types.h | 4 ++--
> tools/include/linux/types.h | 2 +-
> tools/testing/selftests/futex/include/atomic.h | 2 +-
> .../rcutorture/formal/srcu-cbmc/include/linux/types.h | 4 ++--
> 6 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/atomic.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/atomic.h
> index 66d0e215a773..2ed6d7cf1407 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/atomic.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/atomic.h
> @@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ ATOMIC_OPS(xor, ^=, eor)
>
> #ifndef CONFIG_GENERIC_ATOMIC64
> typedef struct {
> - long long counter;
> + u64 __aligned(8) counter;
> } atomic64_t;
Long long is 8-byte aligned per EABI ARM, and we use the generic atomic64
infrastructure for OABI, so we don't need to change anything here afaict.
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists