From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,T_DKIM_INVALID, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9275C5CFEB for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 15:45:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8855A2087F for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 15:45:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="heNt1XSR" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8855A2087F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933405AbeGIPpn (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jul 2018 11:45:43 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:60128 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932688AbeGIPpl (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jul 2018 11:45:41 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=pPco/asdqDwIrsXvUcoo19/R9u6XdrYqoTLu2G0NKwo=; b=heNt1XSRb37SR62s+uTw1QxTy cBJe/m2D9Iy8KYNTkLctFwbeI/3AWDo/8v/EuFXTydPTw4SQEUGko5fu8/1tDX8zDPDC+7wHYgRcG tXVk+GPbuOcCCIKxbnAmC+XeRlUJgdyZEXpeXmEq/+ALiw9WMufTgzSsk9DZoUZOf/GOA1DO5k2JA ZdnlhEvFLiRnlTK8771gYotQ1SRC49PmKesYSu2vOdYOYPidJGxrXGyXrt1eBMJpE1cDJcITSle/k Yl5mvgTNYBeNv1YpfSt6QBIZwuZkrhdybGPS/gUoUUUeFettTMnr2dfD+PZdJYXpPD9jxIj7cTRg+ f+l+bz0Ew==; Received: from j217100.upc-j.chello.nl ([24.132.217.100] helo=hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1fcYLq-0003SH-NM; Mon, 09 Jul 2018 15:45:23 +0000 Received: by hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6A09920289CF4; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 17:45:21 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2018 17:45:21 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Mark Rutland Cc: Alexey Brodkin , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org" , "stable@vger.kernel.org" , "greg@kroah.com" , "will.deacon@arm.com" , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "David.Laight@ACULAB.COM" , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , "geert@linux-m68k.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] devres: Explicitly align datai[] to 64-bit Message-ID: <20180709154521.GS2512@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20180709134550.29541-1-abrodkin@synopsys.com> <20180709140717.GR2476@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180709141056.GR2512@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <44727d3cebda7bee5b68fb388bd2fecfc6dc7b89.camel@synopsys.com> <20180709144925.GU2476@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180709152958.565weccfaktqauef@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> <20180709153427.GY2476@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180709153427.GY2476@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.0 (2018-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 05:34:27PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 04:29:58PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > > Shouldn't that be 8? AFAICT, __alignof__(unsigned long long) is 8 on > > x86_32: > > Curious, I wonder why we put that align in atomic64_32 then. Shiny, look at this: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54188