Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 22 Aug 2016 18:55:58 +1000 (EST)
From:      Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
To:        Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru>
Cc:        Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>, Ed Schouten <ed@freebsd.org>,  src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org,  svn-src-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r304555 - head/sys/compat/cloudabi
Message-ID:  <20160822184056.M1897@besplex.bde.org>
In-Reply-To: <20160821170611.GC8192@zxy.spb.ru>
References:  <201608210741.u7L7fBnN075023@repo.freebsd.org> <20160821105207.GS22212@zxy.spb.ru> <20160821210751.J2219@besplex.bde.org> <20160821120016.GZ8192@zxy.spb.ru> <20160821223255.K2478@besplex.bde.org> <20160821131447.GA8192@zxy.spb.ru> <20160821232721.G2639@besplex.bde.org> <20160821135826.GB8192@zxy.spb.ru> <20160822022832.Q3214@besplex.bde.org> <20160821170611.GC8192@zxy.spb.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 21 Aug 2016, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 02:49:07AM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 21 Aug 2016, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 11:39:02PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 21 Aug 2016, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
>>>>> I am remeber about platforms with missaligment trap when
>>>>> accessing int16 by odd address. Now platforms like this do not exist
>>>>> anymore?
>>>>
>>>> i386 still exists, and it supports trapping on misalignement for at least
>>>> CPL 3 (not kernel CPL 0).  IIRC, amd64 drops support for this.
>>>
>>> Someone enable and support this? I am don't see.
>>> May be PPC trap on this?
>>> Alpha trap on this, but support of Alpha is droped.
>>
>> It is a 1-line change in asm (or a little more in C with #includes) to
>> enable the trap:
>
> OK, we can turn amd64 in this mode.
> And cat do request to kernel with unalligned access, this cause trap
> and panic, yes?

No.  PSL_AC is ignored in kernel mode.

>> It is a trillion-line change to fix the compilers and applications to not
>> do misaligned accesses :-).  I only tried to use this ~25 years ago.  Then
>> the most obvious compiler bug was generating 32-bit acccesses to assign
>> large but misaligned structs.  If the compiler just generated calls to
>> memcpy(), that might work, but in practice libraries also assume alignment.
>
> This issuse can be trigerred and by two-bytes assigmen, yes?

Not quite that short.  i386 has the 1-byte cli instruction for conveniently
setting the interrupt enable flag, but setting PSL_AC seems to take at
least 3 instructions and 6-7 bytes (pushf; orb $N,$M(%[re][bs]p); popf).

>>>>>> There are also endianness problems.  The old version was even more broken
>>>>>> on big endian systems.  The current version needs some magic to reverse
>>>>>> the memcpy() of the bits.  We already depend on this for some 64-bit
>>>>>> syscalls like lseek().
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you explain some more?
>>>>> This is not transfer over network and don't read from external media.
>>>>> Where is problem?
>>>>
>>>> It is similar to a network transfer.  It needs a protocol to pass values
>>>> to applications.  Type puns are fragile even within a single compilation
>>>> unit.
>>>
>>> Application ad kernel run with same byte order, not?
>>
>> The application can do anything it wants, but has to translate if it uses
>> the kernel or a library written in another language.
>
> You talk about different byte order in differenr languages?

Could be, or the same language with a different ABI.

Bruce



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160822184056.M1897>