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;
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.40.0.1.81\))
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Fixed: Misaligned memory access. Fixed pointer
 comparison.
From:   Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@jrtc27.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220123034518.3717116-1-michael@michaelkloos.com>
Date:   Sun, 23 Jan 2022 15:44:51 +0000
Cc:     Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <485047B2-E566-4679-87CF-C4B3CAFEF108@jrtc27.com>
References: <20220123034518.3717116-1-michael@michaelkloos.com>
To:     "Michael T. Kloos" <michael@michaelkloos.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 23 Jan 2022, at 03:45, Michael T. Kloos <michael@michaelkloos.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> Rewrote the riscv memmove() assembly implementation.  The
> previous implementation did not check memory alignment and it
> compared 2 pointers with a signed comparison.  The misaligned
> memory access would cause the kernel to crash on systems that
> did not emulate it in firmware and did not support it in hardware.
> Firmware emulation is slow and may not exist.  Additionally,
> hardware support may not exist and would likely still run slower
> than aligned accesses even if it did.  The RISC-V spec does not
> guarantee that support for misaligned memory accesses will exist.
> It should not be depended on.
>=20
> This patch now checks for the maximum granularity of co-alignment
> between the pointers and copies them with that, using single-byte
> copy for any unaligned data at their terminations.  It also now uses
> unsigned comparison for the pointers.
>=20
> Added half-word and, if built for 64-bit, double-word copy.
>=20
> Migrated to the	newer assembler annotations from the now =
deprecated
> ones.
>=20
> Commit Message Edited on Jan 22 2022: Fixed some typos.
>=20
> [v2]
>=20
> Per kernel test robot, I have fixed the build under clang.  This
> was broken due to a difference between gcc and clang, clang requiring
> explict zero offsets the jalr instruction. gcc allowed them to be
> omitted if zero.

Unlike LLVM, GCC does not have an assembler, that=E2=80=99s binutils=E2=80=
=99s GNU as.

Jess