From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>
To: "Finn Thain" <fthain@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: "Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Boqun Feng" <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>,
"Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, "Lance Yang" <lance.yang@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 2/3] atomic: Specify alignment for atomic_t and atomic64_t
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2025 08:35:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e02f861b-706c-4f6d-bded-002601da954a@app.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ec2982e3-2996-918e-f406-32f67a0decfe@linux-m68k.org>
On Tue, Sep 30, 2025, at 04:18, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2025, I wrote:
>>
>> ... there's still some kmem cache or other allocator somewhere that has
>> produced some misaligned path and dentry structures. So we get
>> misaligned atomics somewhere in the VFS and TTY layers. I was unable to
>> find those allocations.
>>
>
> It turned out that the problem wasn't dynamic allocations, it was a local
> variable in the core locking code (kernel/locking/rwsem.c): a misaligned
> long used with an atomic operation (cmpxchg). To get natural alignment for
> 64-bit quantities, I had to align other local variables as well, such as
> the one in ktime_get_real_ts64_mg() that's used with
> atomic64_try_cmpxchg(). The atomic_t branch in my github repo has the
> patches I wrote for that.
It looks like the variable you get the warning for is not
even the atomic64_t but the 'old' argument to atomic64_try_cmpxchg(),
at least in some of the cases you found if not all of them.
I don't see where why there is a requirement to have that
aligned at all, even if we do require the atomic64_t to
be naturally aligned, and I would expect the same warning
to hit on x86-32 and the other architectures with 4-byte
alignment of u64 variable on stack and .data.
> To silence the misalignment WARN from CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC, for 64-bit
> atomic operations, for my small m68k .config, it was also necesary to
> increase ARCH_SLAB_MINALIGN to 8. However, I'm not advocating a
> ARCH_SLAB_MINALIGN increase, as that wastes memory.
Have you tried to quantify the memory waste here? I assume
that most slab allocations are already 8-byte aligned, at
least kmalloc() with size>4, while custom caches are usually
done for larger structures where an extra average of 2 bytes
per allocation may not be that bad.
> diff --git a/include/linux/instrumented.h b/include/linux/instrumented.h
> index 402a999a0d6b..cd569a87c0a8 100644
> --- a/include/linux/instrumented.h
> +++ b/include/linux/instrumented.h
> @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ static __always_inline void
> instrument_atomic_read(const volatile void *v, size_
> {
> kasan_check_read(v, size);
> kcsan_check_atomic_read(v, size);
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC) && ((unsigned long)v &
> (size - 1)));
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC) && ((unsigned long)v &
> (size - 1) & 3));
> }
What is the alignment of stack variables on m68k? E.g. if you
have a function with two local variables, would that still
be able to trigger the check?
int f(atomic64_t *a)
{
u16 pad;
u64 old;
g(&pad);
atomic64_try_cmpxchg(a, &old, 0);
}
Since there is nothing telling the compiler that
the 'old' argument to atomic*_try_cmpcxchg() needs to
be naturally aligned, maybe that check should be changed
to only test for the ABI-guaranteed alignment? I think
that would still be needed on x86-32.
Arnd
diff --git a/include/linux/atomic/atomic-instrumented.h b/include/linux/atomic/atomic-instrumented.h
index 9409a6ddf3e0..e57763a889bd 100644
--- a/include/linux/atomic/atomic-instrumented.h
+++ b/include/linux/atomic/atomic-instrumented.h
@@ -1276,7 +1276,7 @@ atomic_try_cmpxchg(atomic_t *v, int *old, int new)
{
kcsan_mb();
instrument_atomic_read_write(v, sizeof(*v));
- instrument_atomic_read_write(old, sizeof(*old));
+ instrument_atomic_read_write(old, alignof(*old));
return raw_atomic_try_cmpxchg(v, old, new);
}
@@ -1298,7 +1298,7 @@ static __always_inline bool
atomic_try_cmpxchg_acquire(atomic_t *v, int *old, int new)
{
instrument_atomic_read_write(v, sizeof(*v));
- instrument_atomic_read_write(old, sizeof(*old));
+ instrument_atomic_read_write(old, alignof(*old));
return raw_atomic_try_cmpxchg_acquire(v, old, new);
}
@@ -1321,7 +1321,7 @@ atomic_try_cmpxchg_release(atomic_t *v, int *old, int new)
{
kcsan_release();
instrument_atomic_read_write(v, sizeof(*v));
- instrument_atomic_read_write(old, sizeof(*old));
+ instrument_atomic_read_write(old, alignof(*old));
return raw_atomic_try_cmpxchg_release(v, old, new);
}
@@ -1343,7 +1343,7 @@ static __always_inline bool
atomic_try_cmpxchg_relaxed(atomic_t *v, int *old, int new)
{
instrument_atomic_read_write(v, sizeof(*v));
- instrument_atomic_read_write(old, sizeof(*old));
+ instrument_atomic_read_write(old, alignof(*old));
return raw_atomic_try_cmpxchg_relaxed(v, old, new);
}
@@ -2854,7 +2854,7 @@ atomic64_try_cmpxchg(atomic64_t *v, s64 *old, s64 new)
{
kcsan_mb();
instrument_atomic_read_write(v, sizeof(*v));
- instrument_atomic_read_write(old, sizeof(*old));
+ instrument_atomic_read_write(old, alignof(*old));
return raw_atomic64_try_cmpxchg(v, old, new);
}
@@ -2876,7 +2876,7 @@ static __always_inline bool
atomic64_try_cmpxchg_acquire(atomic64_t *v, s64 *old, s64 new)
{
instrument_atomic_read_write(v, sizeof(*v));
- instrument_atomic_read_write(old, sizeof(*old));
+ instrument_atomic_read_write(old, alignof(*old));
return raw_atomic64_try_cmpxchg_acquire(v, old, new);
}
@@ -2899,7 +2899,7 @@ atomic64_try_cmpxchg_release(atomic64_t *v, s64 *old, s64 new)
{
kcsan_release();
instrument_atomic_read_write(v, sizeof(*v));
- instrument_atomic_read_write(old, sizeof(*old));
+ instrument_atomic_read_write(old, alignof(*old));
return raw_atomic64_try_cmpxchg_release(v, old, new);
}
@@ -2921,7 +2921,7 @@ static __always_inline bool
atomic64_try_cmpxchg_relaxed(atomic64_t *v, s64 *old, s64 new)
{
instrument_atomic_read_write(v, sizeof(*v));
- instrument_atomic_read_write(old, sizeof(*old));
+ instrument_atomic_read_write(old, alignof(*old));
return raw_atomic64_try_cmpxchg_relaxed(v, old, new);
}
@@ -4432,7 +4432,7 @@ atomic_long_try_cmpxchg(atomic_long_t *v, long *old, long new)
{
kcsan_mb();
instrument_atomic_read_write(v, sizeof(*v));
- instrument_atomic_read_write(old, sizeof(*old));
+ instrument_atomic_read_write(old, alignof(*old));
return raw_atomic_long_try_cmpxchg(v, old, new);
}
@@ -4454,7 +4454,7 @@ static __always_inline bool
atomic_long_try_cmpxchg_acquire(atomic_long_t *v, long *old, long new)
{
instrument_atomic_read_write(v, sizeof(*v));
- instrument_atomic_read_write(old, sizeof(*old));
+ instrument_atomic_read_write(old, alignof(*old));
return raw_atomic_long_try_cmpxchg_acquire(v, old, new);
}
@@ -4477,7 +4477,7 @@ atomic_long_try_cmpxchg_release(atomic_long_t *v, long *old, long new)
{
kcsan_release();
instrument_atomic_read_write(v, sizeof(*v));
- instrument_atomic_read_write(old, sizeof(*old));
+ instrument_atomic_read_write(old, alignof(*old));
return raw_atomic_long_try_cmpxchg_release(v, old, new);
}
@@ -4499,7 +4499,7 @@ static __always_inline bool
atomic_long_try_cmpxchg_relaxed(atomic_long_t *v, long *old, long new)
{
instrument_atomic_read_write(v, sizeof(*v));
- instrument_atomic_read_write(old, sizeof(*old));
+ instrument_atomic_read_write(old, alignof(*old));
return raw_atomic_long_try_cmpxchg_relaxed(v, old, new);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-30 6:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-14 0:45 [RFC v2 0/3] Align atomic storage Finn Thain
2025-09-14 0:45 ` [RFC v2 2/3] atomic: Specify alignment for atomic_t and atomic64_t Finn Thain
2025-09-15 7:13 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2025-09-15 7:35 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-09-15 8:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-15 9:26 ` Finn Thain
2025-09-15 9:29 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-09-22 7:06 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2025-09-22 8:16 ` Finn Thain
2025-09-22 9:29 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2025-09-22 15:21 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-09-23 6:28 ` Finn Thain
2025-09-23 6:41 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-09-23 8:05 ` Finn Thain
2025-09-23 19:11 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-09-30 2:18 ` Finn Thain
2025-09-30 6:35 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2025-10-01 1:03 ` Finn Thain
2025-10-01 6:44 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-10-06 9:25 ` Finn Thain
2025-10-06 9:25 ` Finn Thain
2025-10-06 10:07 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-10-06 10:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-10-06 11:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-10-06 9:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-30 7:41 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2025-10-01 1:46 ` Finn Thain
2025-10-01 7:08 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2025-09-14 0:45 ` [RFC v2 1/3] documentation: Discourage alignment assumptions Finn Thain
2025-09-14 0:45 ` [RFC v2 3/3] atomic: Add alignment check to instrumented atomic operations Finn Thain
2025-09-15 8:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-15 9:38 ` Finn Thain
2025-09-15 10:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-15 10:37 ` Finn Thain
2025-09-15 11:20 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-09-16 0:16 ` Finn Thain
2025-09-16 10:10 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2025-09-17 1:23 ` Finn Thain
2025-09-16 12:37 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-09-16 21:38 ` Brad Boyer
2025-09-17 16:54 ` Andreas Schwab
2025-09-17 2:14 ` Finn Thain
2025-09-22 15:49 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-09-23 6:39 ` Finn Thain
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e02f861b-706c-4f6d-bded-002601da954a@app.fastmail.com \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=fthain@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).