From: John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>
To: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Cc: John David Anglin <dave@parisc-linux.org>,
deller@gmx.de, libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [committed] hppa: Drop 16-byte pthread lock alignment
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2023 21:58:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20cc14ed-d49d-d655-b866-f8f9bb49e0eb@bell.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87zg7zc9km.fsf@gentoo.org>
On 2023-03-26 8:37 p.m., Sam James wrote:
> Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
>
>> * John David Anglin:
>>
>>> hppa: Drop 16-byte pthread lock alignment
>>>
>>> Linux threads were removed about 12 years ago and the current
>>> nptl implementation only requires 4-byte alignment for pthread
>>> locks.
>>>
>>> The 16-byte alignment causes various issues. For example in
>>> building ignition-msgs, we have:
>>>
>>> /usr/include/google/protobuf/map.h:124:37: error: static assertion failed
>>> 124 | static_assert(alignof(value_type) <= 8, "");
>>> | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~
>>>
>>> This is caused by the 16-byte pthread lock alignment.
>> This was done deliberately to preserve ABI. This change needs a mass
>> rebuild because struct offsets after pthread_mutex_t members are
>> likely to change.
Although the change may change some structure offsets, I don't believe the change requires a mass rebuild.
I am running a Debian hppa system with the reduced lock alignment and so far I haven't observed any breakage.
I checked this prior to committing the change.
Packages in Debian unstable are rebuilt frequently.
I don't see that we had much choice. Either we break the ABI or we live with packages that don't work on hppa.
Here is comment in map.h:
// MapAllocator does not support alignments beyond 8. Technically we should
// support up to std::max_align_t, but this fails with ubsan and tcmalloc
// debug allocation logic which assume 8 as default alignment.
static_assert(alignof(value_type) <= 8, "");
It was the above comment that convinced me that we needed to change the pthread lock alignment.
The analysis in the protobuf issue is exactly correct:
https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/issues/9433
Protobuf is not the only package affected by this issue.
Regards,
Dave
--
John David Anglin dave.anglin@bell.net
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-27 1:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-26 21:22 John David Anglin
2023-03-27 0:33 ` Florian Weimer
2023-03-27 0:37 ` Sam James
2023-03-27 1:58 ` John David Anglin [this message]
2023-03-27 12:42 ` Florian Weimer
2023-03-30 21:08 ` John David Anglin
2023-03-31 7:14 ` Florian Weimer
2023-03-27 0:35 ` Sam James
2023-03-27 15:24 ` Pedro Alves
2023-07-06 16:01 ` John David Anglin
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=20cc14ed-d49d-d655-b866-f8f9bb49e0eb@bell.net \
--to=dave.anglin@bell.net \
--cc=dave@parisc-linux.org \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=fw@deneb.enyo.de \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=sam@gentoo.org \
/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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).