[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2d7cddbe-6523-f388-339b-382231514f6f@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2018 10:12:24 +0100
From: Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@....com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
Andrew Pinski <pinskia@...il.com>, mpatocka@...hat.com
Cc: nd@....com, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, linux@...linux.org.uk,
thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
GNU C Library <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>
Subject: Re: framebuffer corruption due to overlapping stp instructions on
arm64
On 03/08/18 08:53, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 08/03/2018 09:11 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> Yes fix Links not to use memcpy on the framebuffer.
>> It is undefined behavior to use device memory with memcpy.
>
> Some (de facto) ABIs require that it is supported, though. For example, the POWER string functions avoid unaligned loads and stores for this
> reason because the platform has the same issue with device memory. And yes, GCC will expand memcpy on POWER to something that is incompatible
> with device memory. 8-(
>
i think it's not reasonable to require libc memcpy to work on device memory.
i think if device memory is exposed to regular userspace applications that should be fixed.
> If we don't want people to use memcpy, we probably need to provide a credible alternative.
>
> Thanks,
> Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists