Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-215135-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 17:16:47 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/9] x86/fpu: Fix 'struct fpu' misalignment on 32-bit
 kernels
Message-ID: <20240614151404.GA27644@redhat.com>
References: <20240608073134.264210-1-mingo@kernel.org>
 <20240608073134.264210-4-mingo@kernel.org>
 <20240610211350.GA1613053@thelio-3990X>
 <20240611124145.GA26798@redhat.com>
 <ZmlZiHVF8w09mExw@gmail.com>
 <20240612184148.GB23973@redhat.com>
 <Zmq9ppuIZJ9IMZDr@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Zmq9ppuIZJ9IMZDr@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)

Hi Ingo, sorry for delay.

On 06/13, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> > @@ -1562,7 +1562,7 @@ struct task_struct {
> >  	 * they are included in the randomized portion of task_struct.
> >  	 */
> >  	randomized_struct_fields_end
> > -};
> > +} __attribute__ ((aligned (64)));

I guess __aligned(64) will look a bit better, but this is minor.

> What happened is that due to my series 'struct task_struct' lost its
> 64-byte alignment attribute, which broke the fpu struct allocation code on
> 32-bit kernels and made the 64-bit one probably unrobust as well.

Yes, and note that struct fpstate has the same __aligned(64), that is
how I noticed the potential problem and decided to check.

But Ingo, it was a shot in the dark ;) I still don't really understand
what exactly should be aligned. Is it the fpstate->regs member? Or what?
If yes, perhaps this member needs __aligned(64) too to be safe?

> ... and would appreciate your Acked-by or Reviewed-by for the eventual
> final version of the series, but I don't insist. ;-)

Thanks ;) will do.

Oleg.