From: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: taskstats alignment...
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 21:18:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D15545A.3020800@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101224211529.GA19019@bicker>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 12/24/2010 04:16 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 01:45:29PM -0500, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> v> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 12/23/2010 12:30 PM, David Miller wrote:
>>>
>>> Re: commit 4be2c95d1f7706ca0e74499f2bd118e1cee19669
>>>
>>> Pretty much every 64-bit architecture other than
>>> powerpc64 and x86-64 needs that code, not just
>>> IA64.
>>>
>>> Better check would be:
>>>
>>> CONFIG_64BIT && !CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
>>>
>>> Otherwise we'll be twiddling that ifdef endlessly as each
>>> and every other 64-bit platform bumps into this issue.
>>>
>>> So please could you change this to use a more sane check?
>>
>> I don't have an objection to it, but I've been pushing that we make the
>> change universal from the beginning of the discussion.
>>
>> The issue is that it causes breakage on apps that aren't following the
>> interface properly. iotop, in particular, has hard-coded offsets into
>> the packet to fish out the taskstats structure.
>>
>> So, if the goal of not breaking x86_64 is good enough, I'm fine with
>> this change.
>
> Didn't you say something along the lines that if they don't have
> CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS then there is a warning message
> printed in dmesg? I thought that was what prompted you to change the
> alignment in the first place. It sound like those arches are already
> broken so David's suggestion would be a clear improvement over the
> current code.
Yes, that is the original reason for the patch. The discussion was
surrounding which arches to break, since I made it universal. Changing
it to CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS (didn't know that existed
before) makes sense.
> BTW, since you're redoing the patch, it would be good if you pasted the
> warning message into the changelog.
Ok, that's easy enough.
- -Jeff
- --
Jeff Mahoney
SUSE Labs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk0VVFgACgkQLPWxlyuTD7JD2gCgi99mSqA29g5k9b9yj7od67mk
rkAAnR5Stz8fY4eYZbRJetz+fyH8D3iz
=zgux
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-25 2:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-23 17:30 taskstats alignment David Miller
2010-12-24 18:45 ` Jeff Mahoney
2010-12-24 21:16 ` Dan Carpenter
2010-12-25 2:18 ` Jeff Mahoney [this message]
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=4D15545A.3020800@suse.com \
--to=jeffm@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=error27@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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