linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] mmc: Add driver for LiteX's LiteSDCard interface

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YbESHK06Tpw3typS@errol.ini.cmu.edu>
Date:   Wed, 8 Dec 2021 15:14:20 -0500
From:   "Gabriel L. Somlo" <gsomlo@...il.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Linux MMC List <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Karol Gugala <kgugala@...micro.com>,
        Mateusz Holenko <mholenko@...micro.com>,
        Kamil Rakoczy <krakoczy@...micro.com>,
        mdudek@...ernships.antmicro.com, paulus@...abs.org,
        Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
        Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com>,
        david.abdurachmanov@...ive.com, florent@...oy-digital.fr,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] mmc: Add driver for LiteX's LiteSDCard interface

Hi Geert,

I did *some* of this for v3, but since figured out how to use `pahole` :)

On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 11:07:56AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > +struct litex_mmc_host {
> > +       struct mmc_host *mmc;
> > +       struct platform_device *dev;
> > +
> > +       void __iomem *sdphy;
> > +       void __iomem *sdcore;
> > +       void __iomem *sdreader;
> > +       void __iomem *sdwriter;
> > +       void __iomem *sdirq;
> > +
> > +       u32 resp[4];
> > +       u16 rca;
> > +
> > +       void *buffer;
> > +       size_t buf_size;
> > +       dma_addr_t dma;
> > +
> > +       unsigned int freq;
> > +       unsigned int clock;
> > +       bool is_bus_width_set;
> > +       bool app_cmd;
> > +
> > +       int irq;
> > +       struct completion cmd_done;
> 
> You may want to reorder the members to avoid implicit gaps
> (i.e. structs first, followed by integral types in decreasing size).

So, for v4, I'll have it looking like this, which `pahole` says is
optimally packed:

struct litex_mmc_host {
	struct mmc_host *          mmc;                  /*     0     8 */
	struct platform_device *   dev;                  /*     8     8 */
	void *                     sdphy;                /*    16     8 */
	void *                     sdcore;               /*    24     8 */
	void *                     sdreader;             /*    32     8 */
	void *                     sdwriter;             /*    40     8 */
	void *                     sdirq;                /*    48     8 */
	void *                     buffer;               /*    56     8 */
	/* --- cacheline 1 boundary (64 bytes) --- */
	size_t                     buf_size;             /*    64     8 */
	dma_addr_t                 dma;                  /*    72     8 */
	struct completion          cmd_done;             /*    80    32 */
	int                        irq;                  /*   112     4 */
	unsigned int               ref_clk;              /*   116     4 */
	unsigned int               sd_clk;               /*   120     4 */
	u32                        resp[4];              /*   124    16 */
	/* --- cacheline 2 boundary (128 bytes) was 12 bytes ago --- */
	u16                        rca;                  /*   140     2 */
	bool                       is_bus_width_set;     /*   142     1 */
	bool                       app_cmd;              /*   143     1 */

	/* size: 144, cachelines: 3, members: 18 */
	/* last cacheline: 16 bytes */
};


Thanks again,
--Gabriel