From: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
To: andres@lagarcavilla.org, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
Cc: ian.jackson@citrix.com, ian.campbell@citrix.com
Subject: Re: memop struct packing, 32/64 bits
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 20:49:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CB3E3263.37CC2%keir@xen.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e8528eebbd67c74ea6898c39f572c846.squirrel@webmail.lagarcavilla.org>
On 19/01/2012 20:30, "Andres Lagar-Cavilla" <andres@lagarcavilla.org> wrote:
> Hi,
> I had the following painful experience. I declared
>
> struct xen_mem_event_op {
> uint8_t op; /* XENMEM_*_op_* */
> domid_t domain;
> uint64_t buffer;
> uint64_t gfn; /* IN: gfn of page being operated on */
> };
> typedef struct xen_mem_event_op xen_mem_event_op_t;
>
> to be passed as the argument of a memory op called form the toolstack. The
> hypervisor is 64 bits and the toolstack is 32 bits. My toolstack code
> simply:
>
> xen_mem_event_op_t meo;
> ... set fields ...
> return do_memory_op(xch, mode, &meo, sizeof(meo));
>
> No joy because 32 bits was packing the struct differently than 64 bits.
> Namely, both were adding a 1 byte pad between 'op' and 'domain', but when
> compiled in 64 bits mode for the hypervisor, an additional 4 byte pad was
> thrown between 'domain' and 'buffer'.
>
> The first question is, what is the preferred way around this. Declare pads
> inside the struct?
Yes.
> Exploring the include/public/memory.h declarations and toolstack code, I
> see that no current declare includes __attribute__((aligned)) or
> __attribute__((packed)), or explicit pads.
>
> So how come things don't break more often for 32 bit toolstacks? pure
> luck? Am I missing something?
Where older structs were not 32/64-bit invariant, compat shims were
implemented. See common/compat/memory.c, for example. Well worth avoiding
that!
-- Keir
> Thanks!
> Andres
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-19 20:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-19 20:30 memop struct packing, 32/64 bits Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-01-19 20:49 ` Keir Fraser [this message]
2012-01-19 20:57 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-01-19 21:11 ` Ian Campbell
2012-01-19 21:21 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-01-19 21:23 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-01-19 21:56 ` Keir Fraser
2012-01-19 22:00 ` Keir Fraser
2012-01-19 22:04 ` Keir Fraser
2012-01-19 22:05 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-01-22 20:37 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-01-22 20:43 ` Keir Fraser
2012-01-23 9:24 ` Jan Beulich
2012-01-23 15:02 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-01-19 20:49 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-01-19 21:07 ` Keir Fraser
2012-01-19 21:12 ` Ian Campbell
2012-01-19 21:56 ` Keir Fraser
2012-01-20 10:12 ` Jan Beulich
2012-01-20 10:32 ` Keir Fraser
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=CB3E3263.37CC2%keir@xen.org \
--to=keir@xen.org \
--cc=andres@lagarcavilla.org \
--cc=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=ian.jackson@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/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).