linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/8] iio: imu: adis16550: align buffers for timestamp

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: <aAEzeY_p6a8Pr-zn@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 19:59:37 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>
To: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
	Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
	Cosmin Tanislav <cosmin.tanislav@...log.com>,
	Tomasz Duszynski <tduszyns@...il.com>,
	Jean-Baptiste Maneyrol <jean-baptiste.maneyrol@....com>,
	Andreas Klinger <ak@...klinger.de>,
	Petre Rodan <petre.rodan@...dimension.ro>,
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] iio: imu: adis16550: align buffers for timestamp

On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 11:52:38AM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> Align the buffers used with iio_push_to_buffers_with_timestamp() to
> ensure the s64 timestamp is aligned to 8 bytes.
> 
>  drivers/iio/accel/bmc150-accel.h | 2 +-
>  drivers/iio/imu/adis16550.c      | 2 +-

Looks like a stray squash of the two independent commits.

...

>  	struct bmc150_accel_trigger triggers[BMC150_ACCEL_TRIGGERS];
>  	struct mutex mutex;
>  	u8 fifo_mode, watermark;
> -	s16 buffer[8];
> +	s16 buffer[8] __aligned(8);

As for the code, would it be possible to convert to actually use a sturcture
rather than an array?

...

>  	struct iio_poll_func *pf = p;
> -	__be32 data[ADIS16550_MAX_SCAN_DATA];
> +	__be32 data[ADIS16550_MAX_SCAN_DATA] __aligned(8);
>  	struct iio_dev *indio_dev = pf->indio_dev;
>  	struct adis16550 *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);

Ditto.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko