On 1/6/2019 5:50 PM, Jason Thorpe wrote:
On Jan 6, 2019, at 1:46 PM, matthew green wrote:
... how do we convey the structure alignment needed for
softc, or do we fix it by moving it into its own separate
aligned allocation?
The latter, I think.
I agree. When a driver has a strict alignment
> On Jan 6, 2019, at 2:26 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>
> Shouldn't the compiler know how to do this right by padding around the
> structure that needs alignment and assuming the default alignment for
> the enclosing structure?
No, because the compiler can't be assured of what alignment the
> On Jan 6, 2019, at 1:46 PM, matthew green wrote:
>
> ... how do we convey the structure alignment needed for
> softc, or do we fix it by moving it into its own separate
> aligned allocation?
The latter, I think.
-- thorpej
> | for xhci, all of these seem to be the same issue and it
> | appears to be a "high level allocator doesn't know what
> | it is allocating and does not align properly". the
> | problem is likely:
> |
> | #define XHCI_TRB_ALIGN 16
> | struct xhci_trb {
> | ...
> | } __packed
On Jan 7, 8:46am, m...@eterna.com.au (matthew green) wrote:
-- Subject: re: Unaligned access in kernel on ARMv6+ (Re: CVS commit: src/sys
| > http://netbsd.org/~kamil/kubsan/0007-boot-real-hardware.txt
|
| for xhci, all of these seem to be the same issue and it
| appears to be a "high level
> http://netbsd.org/~kamil/kubsan/0007-boot-real-hardware.txt
for xhci, all of these seem to be the same issue and it
appears to be a "high level allocator doesn't know what
it is allocating and does not align properly". the
problem is likely:
#define XHCI_TRB_ALIGN 16
struct xhci_trb {
...
}
