[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a1f5838c-8452-48f6-a6b1-e8940270d010@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2024 14:57:36 +0200
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, Wenjun Wu
<wenjun1.wu@...el.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next] virtchnl: fix m68k build.
On 10/17/24 08:39, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On 10/17/24 00:49, Jacob Keller wrote:
>> On 10/15/2024 6:56 AM, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>>> The kernel test robot reported a build failure on m68k in the intel
>>> driver due to the recent shapers-related changes.
>>>
>>> The mentioned arch has funny alignment properties, let's be explicit
>>> about the binary layout expectation introducing a padding field.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 608a5c05c39b ("virtchnl: support queue rate limit and quanta
>>> size configuration")
>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
>>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202410131710.71Wt6LKO-
>>> lkp@...el.com/
>>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/linux/avf/virtchnl.h | 1 +
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/avf/virtchnl.h b/include/linux/avf/virtchnl.h
>>> index 223e433c39fe..13a11f3c09b8 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/avf/virtchnl.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/avf/virtchnl.h
>>> @@ -1499,6 +1499,7 @@ VIRTCHNL_CHECK_STRUCT_LEN(8,
>>> virtchnl_queue_chunk);
>>> struct virtchnl_quanta_cfg {
>>> u16 quanta_size;
>>> + u16 pad;
>>> struct virtchnl_queue_chunk queue_select;
>>
>> There's a hidden 2 byte padding because queue_select requires 4-byte
>> alignment. We assume this, as the VIRTCHNL_CHECK_STRUCT_LEN for this
>> structure is 12 bytes.
>>
>> On mk68k, we must not be adding this padding, which results in a 10 byte
>> structure, failing the size check for VIRTCHNL_CHECK_STRUCT_LEN,
>> resulting in the compilation error?
>
> Exactly!
>
>> Adding the explicit size aligns with the actual expected layout and size
>> for this structure, fixing mk68k without affecting the other
>> architectures.
>>
>> Ok.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Please LMK if you prefer/agree to have this one applied directly on net-
> next, to reduce build issues spawning around ASAP.
>
> Paolo
>
Would be convenient, no objections!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists