From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xen: fix alignment for bitops
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 11:22:27 +0100
Message-ID: <534FAB63.60709@citrix.com>
References: <1397634938-5470-1-git-send-email-murzin.v@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta4.messagelabs.com ([85.158.143.247])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <david.vrabel@citrix.com>) id 1WajSh-0002io-Nl
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 10:22:31 +0000
In-Reply-To: <1397634938-5470-1-git-send-email-murzin.v@gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Vladimir Murzin <murzin.v@gmail.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, Ian.Campbell@citrix.com, JBeulich@suse.com, david.vrabel@citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 16/04/14 08:55, Vladimir Murzin wrote:
> Bitops operations like set/clear/change mandate world aligned pointer, mainly
> because architectures specific implementation.
> 
> Looks that DEFINE_PER_CPU does required alignment for cpu_control_block;
> however, local copy used for bitops might not be world aligned.
> 
> For arm64 it ends up with unaligned access trap...

Thanks.  Does this version work for you?

David

8<----------------------
xen/events/fifo: fix alignment for bitops on local ready word

Bitops operations like set_bit(), clear_bit(), and test_bit() require
word aligned pointers, because of architectures specific
implementations.

Looks that DEFINE_PER_CPU does required alignment for
cpu_control_block; however, local copy of the ready word might not be
word aligned.

For arm64 it ends up with unaligned access trap at:

    if (head == 0)
        clear_bit(priority, BM(ready));

Use unsigned long for "ready" to make sure it is word aligned.

Signed-off-by: Vladimir Murzin <murzin.v@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com
---
 drivers/xen/events/events_fifo.c |    6 +++---
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/xen/events/events_fifo.c b/drivers/xen/events/events_fifo.c
index 96109a9..475d967 100644
--- a/drivers/xen/events/events_fifo.c
+++ b/drivers/xen/events/events_fifo.c
@@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ static void handle_irq_for_port(unsigned port)
 
 static void consume_one_event(unsigned cpu,
 			      struct evtchn_fifo_control_block *control_block,
-			      unsigned priority, uint32_t *ready)
+			      unsigned priority, unsigned long *ready)
 {
 	struct evtchn_fifo_queue *q = &per_cpu(cpu_queue, cpu);
 	uint32_t head;
@@ -273,7 +273,7 @@ static void consume_one_event(unsigned cpu,
 	 * copy of the ready word.
 	 */
 	if (head == 0)
-		clear_bit(priority, BM(ready));
+		clear_bit(priority, ready);
 
 	if (sync_test_bit(EVTCHN_FIFO_PENDING, BM(word))
 	    && !sync_test_bit(EVTCHN_FIFO_MASKED, BM(word)))
@@ -285,7 +285,7 @@ static void consume_one_event(unsigned cpu,
 static void evtchn_fifo_handle_events(unsigned cpu)
 {
 	struct evtchn_fifo_control_block *control_block;
-	uint32_t ready;
+	unsigned long ready;
 	unsigned q;
 
 	control_block = per_cpu(cpu_control_block, cpu);