[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whfmwzjF4eBPYS6pHFqHVzJF3m=2h=gRWSRyHks8V=ABA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 May 2022 13:31:24 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>,
Shiraz Hashim <shiraz.linux.kernel@...il.com>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>,
Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
SoC Team <soc@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: mainline build failure due to f1e4c916f97f ("drm/edid: add EDID
block count and size helpers")
On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 11:59 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>
> It's CONFIG_ARM_AEABI, which is normally set everywhere. Without this
> option, you the kernel is built for the old 'OABI' that forces all non-packed
> struct members to be at least 16-bit aligned.
Looks like forced word (32 bit) alignment to me.
I wonder how many other structures that messes up, but I committed the
EDID fix for now.
This has presumably been broken for a long time, but maybe the
affected targets don't typically use EDID and kernel modesetting, and
only use some fixed display setup instead.
Those structure definitions go back a _loong_ time (from a quick 'git
blame' I see November 2008).
But despite that, I did not mark my fix 'cc:stable' because I don't
know if any of those machines affected by this bad arm ABI issue could
possibly care.
At least my tree hopefully now builds on them, with the BUILD_BUG_ON()
that uncovered this.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists