[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANiDSCsA-Rq4xSLUsAazv=ZjYDOAJNDqFjbNKDno1VzZmUrCDA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2022 23:59:16 +0100
From: Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...omium.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Max Staudt <mstaudt@...omium.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
Yunke Cao <yunkec@...omium.org>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] media: uvcvideo: Do not alloc dev->status
Hi Christoph
On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 13:48, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 11:57:19AM +0100, Ricardo Ribalda wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * Ensure that status is aligned, making it safe to use with
> > + * non-coherent DMA.
> > + */
> > + struct uvc_status status __aligned(ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN);
>
> This should be ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN, not ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN.
>
> Note that without an __aligned tag on the next member as well, those
> next members might get cache corrupted.
>
> >
> > struct input_dev *input;
>
> .. and without also aligning the next member you'll might still
> corrupt everything adter the DMAed member.
>
> That's the reason why I generall advocate against playing these
> __aligned games as they can easily go wrong if someone reorders
> the structure.
Thanks a lot for the explanation. I agree, we should keep the
allocation as it is :). Sorry for the noise
Best regards!
--
Ricardo Ribalda
Powered by blists - more mailing lists