Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760216AbYCYU5i (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:57:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760098AbYCYU53 (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:57:29 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:47572 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756923AbYCYU52 (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:57:28 -0400 Message-ID: <47E96709.9060904@zytor.com> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:56:41 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?T=F6r=F6k_Edwin?= CC: "Thomas Gleixner mingo@redhat.com" , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: gcc-4.3 considers unaligned accesses on X86 as undefined References: <47E965BD.7010604@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <47E965BD.7010604@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1583 Lines: 34 T?r?k Edwin wrote: > Hello x86 architecture maintainers, > > GCC-4.3 now considers that it is undefined behaviour to access memory > through an int* that is not aligned to sizeof(int). > At -O3 it generates vectorized code that _relies_ on the fact that > pointers are always aligned (unless you use packed attributes, etc.), > and the resulting code crashes if the pointer is unaligned. (-O3 -msse > on 32-bit, and simply -O3 on 64-bit since -msse is default) > See this gcc bugreport: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35653 > [I do not really agree with this sudden change, because unaligned > accesses have always been possible on x86, but the C99 standard does say > it is undefined behaviour ...] > > I thought to inform you of this change in gcc's behaviour, because > include/asm-x86/unaligned.h is no longer safe in the above context, > especially that it is being used in a loop: > http://lxr.linux.no/linux/net/bluetooth/bnep/core.c#L153 > > P.S.: I only compile my kernels with -O2, so I don't know if it actually > crashes or not at -O3. > Generating vectorized code in the kernel is death anyway, so I don't think the change in alignment is an issue. We CANNOT ALLOW vectorized code in the kernel under any circumstances (well, except when surrounded by the appropriate protection constructs.) -hpa -- 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/