lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Memory corruption due to word sharing
On Fri, 3 Feb 2012, DJ Delorie wrote:

>
> Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> writes:
> > we've spotted the following mismatch between what kernel folks expect
> > from a compiler and what GCC really does, resulting in memory corruption on
> > some architectures. Consider the following structure:
> > struct x {
> > long a;
> > unsigned int b1;
> > unsigned int b2:1;
> > };
>
> If this structure were volatile, you could try
> -fstrict-volatile-bitfields, which forces GCC to use the C type to
> define the access width, instead of doing whatever it thinks is optimal.
>
> Note: that flag is enabled by default for some targets already, most
> notably ARM.

Note that -fstrict-volatile-bitfields does not work for

volatile struct S {
int i : 1;
char c;
} s;
int main()
{
s.i = 1;
s.c = 2;
}
where it accesses s.i using SImode. -fstrict-volatile-bitfields
falls foul of all the games bitfield layout plays and the
irrelevantness of the declared bitfield type (but maybe the
ARM ABI exactly specifies it that way).

So no, I would not recommend -fstrict-volatile-bitfields.

Richard.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-03 10:39    [W:0.221 / U:0.868 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site