Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752834Ab2E0QDq (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 May 2012 12:03:46 -0400 Received: from avon.wwwdotorg.org ([70.85.31.133]:57333 "EHLO avon.wwwdotorg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752734Ab2E0QDW (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 May 2012 12:03:22 -0400 Message-ID: <4FC25048.109@wwwdotorg.org> Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 10:03:20 -0600 From: Stephen Warren User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jonathan Cameron , Russell King CC: kay.sievers@vrfy.org, LKML , linux-arm-kernel Subject: Re: arm: Remaining issue with alignment of __log_buf in printk.c References: <4FC22098.3070803@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <4FC22098.3070803@kernel.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1821 Lines: 46 On 05/27/2012 06:39 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > Hi All, > > My stargate 2 board refused to start and after bisection I ended > up at the same patch that Stephen found an alignment issue in. > Unfortunately Stephen's patch doesn't seem to have fixed the > issue for me. > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/5/10/510 is the thread. Patch from > Stephen is : f8450fca6ecdea38b5a882fdf6cd097e3ec8651c > > Increasing the alignement for 32 bit systems to 8 seems to do the > job but I can't immediately think why... > > System is a pxa27x strong arm. The first element in the structure type that's actually stored in the __log_buf array is a u64; see struct log in kernel/printk.c. Depending on alignment rules, a u64 and a struct containing it might require a 4-byte or 8-byte alignment. The following link implies this might have changed over time: http://wiki.debian.org/ArmEabiPort#Struct_packing_and_alignment (see "64-bit data type alignment" a little below that anchor). I'm not sure what ABI the kernel expects to use internally, or your compiler; perhaps you need the new EABI 8-byte alignment requirement for a u64 and hence the struct as a whole, but Tegra (or my toolchain?) is OK with the older 4-byte alignment for a u64 or struct? Further, I'm not sure if the following alignment selection logic: > #if !defined(CONFIG_64BIT) || defined(CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS) > #define LOG_ALIGN 4 > #else > #define LOG_ALIGN 8 > #endif ... uses the CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS for its intended purpose? Russell, can you please comment here. Thanks. -- 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/