On Thu 27-08-15 10:28:48, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Aug 2015, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 27-08-15 17:09:17, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Btw. Do we need the same think for page::mapping and KSM?
> >
> > I guess we are safe here because the address for mappings comes from
> > kmalloc and that aligned properly, right?
>
> Not quite right, in fact. Because usually the struct address_space
> is embedded within the struct inode (at i_data), and the struct inode
> embedded within the fs-dependent inode, and that's what's kmalloc'ed.
>
> What makes the mapping pointer low bits safe is include/linux/fs.h:
> struct address_space {
> ...
> } __attribute__((aligned(sizeof(long))));
Oh, right you are.
> Which we first had to add in for the cris architecture, which stumbled
> not on a genuine allocated address_space, but on that funny statically
> declared swapper_space in mm/swap_state.c.
Thanks for the clarification.
> But struct anon_vma and KSM's struct stable_node (which depend on
> the same scheme for low bits of page->mapping) have no such alignment
> attribute specified: those ones are indeed relying on the kmalloc
> guarantee as you suppose.
>
> Does struct rcu_head have no __attribute__((aligned(whatever)))?
> Perhaps that attribute should be added when it's needed.
That's basically what I meant in the previous email.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
