On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 03:23:31PM +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote: >> Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:02:55PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> > >> >> As "kernel_ulong_t driver_info" is no longer naturally aligned, the >> >> compiler will >> >> add implicit padding. But the padding depends on the architecture. >> > >> > Ah, so we were "lucky" before, nice. >> >> I don't really believe in luck :-) I think someone has been really >> smart here. Maybe too smart... > > No, I think the previous structure was just "lucky" in that it just > happened to be the right alignment. I say this as I think I was the one > who created that structure years ago. Or maybe not, this was back in > the 2.3 kernel days, I can't remember what patches I wrote last week... > >> >> It can be fixed by adding explicit padding. Probably it should be padded by >> >> 7 bytes (not 3), as kernel_ulong_t may require 8-byte alignment on some 64-bit >> >> platforms. Or by an explicit alignment attribute. >> >> >> >> See also >> >> * commit 8175fe2dda1c93a9c596921c8ed4a0b4baccdefe ("HID: fix >> >> hid_device_id for cross compiling") >> >> * commit 7492d4a416d68ab4bd254b36ffcc4e0138daa8ff ("sdio: fix module >> >> device table definition for m68k") >> >> * commit 9e2d3cd34a159948dc753a14573e16bffc04dba8 ("[PATCH] >> >> mod_devicetable.h fixes") >> > >> > So would the patch below fix this? It should force alignment of the >> > driver_data field, which is all you want here, right? >> > >> >> Still, there's a bug in file2alias (which is compiled by the host >> >> compiler), in that >> >> it may use different padding than the target platform when cross-compiling. >> > >> > That's not good, but outside of this specific issue, right? Have we >> > just been fortunate it hasn't really hit us yet? >> > >> > thanks, >> > >> > greg k-h >> > >> > diff --git a/include/linux/mod_devicetable.h b/include/linux/mod_devicetable.h >> > index 7771d45..6955045 100644 >> > --- a/include/linux/mod_devicetable.h >> > +++ b/include/linux/mod_devicetable.h >> > @@ -122,7 +122,8 @@ struct usb_device_id { >> > __u8 bInterfaceNumber; >> > >> > /* not matched against */ >> > - kernel_ulong_t driver_info; >> > + kernel_ulong_t driver_info >> > + __attribute__((aligned(sizeof(kernel_ulong_t)))); >> > }; >> >> >> This feels a lot like papering over the real problem. It will solve >> this instance, but the list of such previous "paper work" that Geert >> provided should be enough evidence that this will happen again the next >> time someone modifies a device id struct for some subsystem. > > Hopefully not, if you add another field here, the alignment force will > keep things lined up properly, from what I can tell. Is that not true? ... for struct usb_device_id. But not for all other existing and future device ID types. We have kernel_ulong_t to tell the host compiler what the target's unsigned long type (actually only its size, not alignment) is. scripts/mod/file2alias.c handles this with: #if KERNEL_ELFCLASS == ELFCLASS32 typedef Elf32_Addr kernel_ulong_t; #define BITS_PER_LONG 32 #else typedef Elf64_Addr kernel_ulong_t; #define BITS_PER_LONG 64 #endif To fix the misalignment issue, can't we add "__attribute__((aligned(2)))" to the typedef when cross-compiling for m68k? Still, that only solves the problem for "kernel_ulong_t". Not for all other 4 or 8 bytes types (in practice just "u32") that are used in include/linux/mod_devicetable.h. So we would also need "kernel_u32". And "kernel_u16" for consistency. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html