Re: [PATCH] Introduce compat_u64 and compat_s64 types

[David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>]

On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 13:55 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Friday 15 June 2007 11:31:37 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > One common problem with 32 bit system call and ioctl emulation
> > is the different alignment rules between i386 and 64 bit machines.
> > A number of drivers work around this by marking the compat
> > structures as 'attribute((packed))', which is not the right
> > solution because it breaks all the non-x86 architectures that
> > want to use the same compat code.
> 
> Why does it break them? It should just make them a little slower.
> 
> The network code requires unaligned accesses to work
> anyways so if your architecture doesn't support them it is already
> remotely crashable.

alignof(uint64_t) is 8 on just about every 32-bit architecture except
i386. Using __attribute__((packed)) for the 32-on-64 compat code is thus
wrong on every 64-bit architecture except x86_64 and ia64.

It's the _location_ which is wrong; the handling of unaligned loads is
irrelevant (and Linux actually supports a bunch of architecture on which
fixups are impossible now, btw).

-- 
dwmw2

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/