Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: -Walign-mismatch in block/blk-mq.c
To:     Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com
References: <20210310182307.zzcbi5w5jrmveld4@archlinux-ax161>
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Message-ID: <99cf90ea-81c0-e110-4815-dd1f7df36cb4@kernel.dk>
Date:   Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:21:52 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210310182307.zzcbi5w5jrmveld4@archlinux-ax161>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 3/10/21 11:23 AM, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> There is a new clang warning added in the development branch,
> -Walign-mismatch, which shows an instance in block/blk-mq.c:
> 
> block/blk-mq.c:630:39: warning: passing 8-byte aligned argument to
> 32-byte aligned parameter 2 of 'smp_call_function_single_async' may
> result in an unaligned pointer access [-Walign-mismatch]
>                 smp_call_function_single_async(cpu, &rq->csd);
>                                                     ^
> 1 warning generated.
> 
> There appears to be some history here as I can see that this member was
> purposefully unaligned in commit 4ccafe032005 ("block: unalign
> call_single_data in struct request"). However, I later see a change in
> commit 7c3fb70f0341 ("block: rearrange a few request fields for better
> cache layout") that seems somewhat related. Is it possible to get back
> the alignment by rearranging the structure again? This seems to be the
> only solution for the warning aside from just outright disabling it,
> which would be a shame since it seems like it could be useful for
> architectures that cannot handle unaligned accesses well, unless I am
> missing something obvious :)

It should not be hard to ensure that alignment without re-introducing
the bloat. Is there some background on why 32-byte alignment is
required?

-- 
Jens Axboe