From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas) Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2018 15:50:17 +0100 Subject: framebuffer corruption due to overlapping stp instructions on arm64 In-Reply-To: <19c70d2a0b224db78f72dd316ad006b8@AcuMS.aculab.com> References: <20180803094129.GB17798@arm.com> <20180808121641.GB24736@iMac.local> <19c70d2a0b224db78f72dd316ad006b8@AcuMS.aculab.com> Message-ID: <20180808145017.GE24736@iMac.local> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 02:26:11PM +0000, David Laight wrote: > From: Mikulas Patocka > > Sent: 08 August 2018 14:47 > ... > > The problem on ARM is that I see data corruption when the overlapping > > unaligned writes are done just by a single core. > > Is this a sequence of unaligned writes (that shouldn't modify the > same physical locations) or an aligned write followed by an > unaligned one that updates part of the earlier write. > (Or the opposite order?) In the memcpy() case, there can be a sequence of unaligned writes but they would not modify the same byte (so no overlapping address at the byte level). -- Catalin