On 02/25/2016 09:44 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> The addition of the "u64 _pkey" has presumably changed the alignment of
> the enclosing union on (some) 32 bit platforms and so added padding
> after the si_code field. This is a user API issue. :-(
>
> [As an aside, I am pretty sure that we should not be using "u64" in a
> uapi header in any case.]
Ahh, so if _addr_bnd wasn't 64-bit-aligned, the compiler is free to
align it and enlarge the structure. But, this only applied to
architectures where _addr_bnd wasn't 64-bit-aligned:
Would anybody object to _pkey being an 'unsigned long'? It would at
least keep existing 64-bit userspace (mostly my tests) from having to
change.
Here's the snippet of the struct in question:
> union {
> /* used when si_code=SEGV_BNDERR */
> struct {
> void __user *_lower;
> void __user *_upper;
> } _addr_bnd;
> /* used when si_code=SEGV_PKUERR */
> u64 _pkey;
> };
