Hi. I didn't want to leave this hanging and it stayed in my head so I
thought I'd better just finish it and test it.
I tried out this patch and it got rid of all three unaligned acces errors
I was seeing with process connectors and the patch is indeed much smaller.
I ran our container daemon pro
> But it's rather a lot of churn for such a thing. Did you consider simply
> using
> put_unaligned() against the specific offending field(s)?
Hi. This was not considered.
I wanted to give you some quick feedback, so I tried your suggestion in the
fork path. It seemed to fix the problem as wel
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:31:32 -0600
Erik Jacobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But it's rather a lot of churn for such a thing. Did you consider simply
> > using
> > put_unaligned() against the specific offending field(s)?
>
> Hi. This was not considered.
>
> I wanted to give you some quick
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 11:54:11 -0600
Erik Jacobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Andrew.
>
> There was some discussion on this patch but I believe we've agreed
> on the first version I sent. This was ACKed by Matt Helsley.
>
> Would you consider taking this in to -mm?
>
> I've included my orig
Hi Andrew.
There was some discussion on this patch but I believe we've agreed
on the first version I sent. This was ACKed by Matt Helsley.
Would you consider taking this in to -mm?
I've included my original patch email at the bottom.
On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 03:52:46PM -0800, Matt Helsley wrote
From: Matt Helsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 19:09:16 -0800
> Hmm, that GCC assumption conflicts with the prototypes of memcpy() I've
> seen.
When GCC expands __builtin_memcpy() internally it looks at the types
of the arguments, and what it knows about their guarenteed alignment.
On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 17:50 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Pete Zaitcev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 17:29:07 -0800
>
> > On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 15:52:47 -0800, Matt Helsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm shocked memcpy() introduces 8-byte stores that violate architect
Pete Zaitcev wrote on Monday, December 11, 2006 5:29 PM
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 15:52:47 -0800, Matt Helsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm shocked memcpy() introduces 8-byte stores that violate architecture
> > alignment rules. Is there any chance this a bug in ia64's memcpy()
> > impleme
From: Pete Zaitcev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 17:29:07 -0800
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 15:52:47 -0800, Matt Helsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm shocked memcpy() introduces 8-byte stores that violate architecture
> > alignment rules. Is there any chance this a bug in ia64'
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 15:52:47 -0800, Matt Helsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm shocked memcpy() introduces 8-byte stores that violate architecture
> alignment rules. Is there any chance this a bug in ia64's memcpy()
> implementation? I've tried to read it but since I'm not familiar with
>
On Thu, 2006-12-07 at 17:22 -0600, Erik Jacobson wrote:
> On ia64, the various functions that make up cn_proc.c cause kernel
> unaligned access errors.
>
> If you are using these, for example, to get notification about
> all tasks forking and exiting, you get multiple unaligned access errors
> per
On Sat, 2006-12-09 at 18:34 -0800, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 15:09:13 -0600, Erik Jacobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Please try to declare u64 timestamp_ns, then copy it into the *ev
> > > instead of copying whole *ev. This ought to fix the problem if
> > > buffer[] ends al
On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 15:09:13 -0600, Erik Jacobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Please try to declare u64 timestamp_ns, then copy it into the *ev
> > instead of copying whole *ev. This ought to fix the problem if
> > buffer[] ends aligned to 32 bits or better.
>
> So I took this suggestion for a
> > Here, we just adjust how the variables are declared and use memcopy to
> > avoid the error messages.
> > - ev->timestamp_ns = timespec_to_ns(&ts);
> > + ev.timestamp_ns = timespec_to_ns(&ts);
> Please try to declare u64 timestamp_ns, then copy it into the *ev
> instead of copying whole *ev.
On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 19:20 -0800, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 17:22:13 -0600, Erik Jacobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Erik,
Thanks for cc'ing me on this patch.
> > Here, we just adjust how the variables are declared and use memcopy to
> > avoid the error messages.
> > -
On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 17:22:13 -0600, Erik Jacobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here, we just adjust how the variables are declared and use memcopy to
> avoid the error messages.
> - ev->timestamp_ns = timespec_to_ns(&ts);
> + ev.timestamp_ns = timespec_to_ns(&ts);
Please try to declare u64
16 matches
Mail list logo
