On 15/03/19 00:16, Fenghua Yu wrote: > Hi, Valo, > > On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 03:16:33PM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Bitmaps are defined on unsigned longs, so the usage of u32[2] in the >>> wlcore driver is incorrect. As noted by Peter Zijlstra, casting arrays >>> to a bitmap is incorrect for big-endian architectures. >>> >>> When looking at it I observed that: >>> >>> - operations on reg_ch_conf_pending is always under the wl_lock mutex, >>> so set_bit is overkill >>> >>> - the only case where reg_ch_conf_pending is accessed a u32 at a time is >>> unnecessary too. >>> >>> This patch cleans up everything in this area, and changes tmp_ch_bitmap >>> to have the proper alignment. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> [...] >> >>> int wlcore_cmd_regdomain_config_locked(struct wl1271 *wl) >>> { >>> struct wl12xx_cmd_regdomain_dfs_config *cmd = NULL; >>> int ret = 0, i, b, ch_bit_idx; >>> - u32 tmp_ch_bitmap[2]; >>> + u32 tmp_ch_bitmap[2] __aligned(sizeof(unsigned long)); >>> struct wiphy *wiphy = wl->hw->wiphy; >>> struct ieee80211_supported_band *band; >>> bool timeout = false; >> >> [...] >> >>> @@ -1754,8 +1751,8 @@ int wlcore_cmd_regdomain_config_locked(struct wl1271 *wl) >>> goto out; >>> } >>> >>> - cmd->ch_bit_map1 = cpu_to_le32(tmp_ch_bitmap[0]); >>> - cmd->ch_bit_map2 = cpu_to_le32(tmp_ch_bitmap[1]); >>> + cmd->ch_bit_map1 = tmp_ch_bitmap[0]; >>> + cmd->ch_bit_map2 = tmp_ch_bitmap[1]; >> >> Will sparse still be happy? AFAICS you are now assigning u32 to __le32: >> >> struct wl12xx_cmd_regdomain_dfs_config { >> struct wl1271_cmd_header header; >> >> __le32 ch_bit_map1; >> __le32 ch_bit_map2; > > Discussion between Peter and Paolo (https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/3/4/521) > may answer your question. No, Kalle is right. You do need to change - u32 tmp_ch_bitmap[2]; + u32 tmp_ch_bitmap[2] __aligned(sizeof(unsigned long)); into - u32 tmp_ch_bitmap[2]; + __le32 tmp_ch_bitmap[2] __aligned(sizeof(unsigned long)); The assignment from wl->reg_ch_conf_pending to tmp_ch_bitmap is fine because it goes through memcpy. Paolo > (Sorry I didn't send to you v4 patch set) > >> >> Also this doesn't depend on anything else from this patchset, right? So >> I could apply this directly? > > You are right. This patch doesn't rely on other patches from this patchset. > This patch just fixes a split lock issue. You could apply this directly > without other patches. > > Thanks. > > -Fenghua >