[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cd9d62b4-addf-49c2-731c-ec7c89cbebc5@linux-m68k.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2025 18:02:43 +1000 (AEST)
From: Finn Thain <fthain@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org>
cc: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>,
Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
amaindex@...look.com, anna.schumaker@...cle.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
geert@...ux-m68k.org, ioworker0@...il.com, joel.granados@...nel.org,
jstultz@...gle.com, leonylgao@...cent.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, longman@...hat.com, mhiramat@...nel.org,
mingo@...hat.com, mingzhe.yang@...com, oak@...sinkinet.fi,
peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, senozhatsky@...omium.org,
tfiga@...omium.org, will@...nel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] hung_task: fix warnings caused by unaligned lock
pointers
On Wed, 10 Sep 2025, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Sep 10 2025, Finn Thain wrote:
>
> > Linux is probably the only non-trivial program that could be feasibly
> > rebuilt with -malign-int without ill effect (i.e. without breaking
> > userland)
>
> No, you can't. It would change the layout of basic user-level
> structures, breaking the syscall ABI.
>
So you'd have to patch the uapi headers at the same time. I think that's
"feasible", no?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists