| Message ID | 20250417-iio-more-timestamp-alignment-v1-5-eafac1e22318@baylibre.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | iio: more timestamp alignment | expand |
On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 11:52:37 -0500 David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> wrote: > Follow the pattern of other drivers and use aligned_s64 for the > timestamp. This will ensure that the timestamp is correctly aligned on > all architectures. > > Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> > --- > drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c b/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c > index 6f4f2ba2c09d5e691df13bc11ca9e3a910d98dc8..a7888146188d09ddbf376b398ee24dab7f0e2611 100644 > --- a/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c > +++ b/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c > @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ static irqreturn_t sps30_trigger_handler(int irq, void *p) > int ret; > struct { > s32 data[4]; /* PM1, PM2P5, PM4, PM10 */ > - s64 ts; > + aligned_s64 ts; Definitely a bug as we have no idea what is next on the stack so fixes tag needed. > } scan; > > mutex_lock(&state->lock); >
On Thu, 2025-04-17 at 11:52 -0500, David Lechner wrote: > Follow the pattern of other drivers and use aligned_s64 for the > timestamp. This will ensure that the timestamp is correctly aligned on > all architectures. > > Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> > --- ditto Reviewed-by: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@analog.com> > drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c b/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c > index > 6f4f2ba2c09d5e691df13bc11ca9e3a910d98dc8..a7888146188d09ddbf376b398ee24dab7f0e2611 > 100644 > --- a/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c > +++ b/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c > @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ static irqreturn_t sps30_trigger_handler(int irq, void *p) > int ret; > struct { > s32 data[4]; /* PM1, PM2P5, PM4, PM10 */ > - s64 ts; > + aligned_s64 ts; > } scan; > > mutex_lock(&state->lock); >
On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 18:36:21 +0100 Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> wrote: > On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 11:52:37 -0500 > David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> wrote: > > > Follow the pattern of other drivers and use aligned_s64 for the > > timestamp. This will ensure that the timestamp is correctly aligned on > > all architectures. > > > > Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> > > --- > > drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c b/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c > > index 6f4f2ba2c09d5e691df13bc11ca9e3a910d98dc8..a7888146188d09ddbf376b398ee24dab7f0e2611 100644 > > --- a/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c > > +++ b/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c > > @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ static irqreturn_t sps30_trigger_handler(int irq, void *p) > > int ret; > > struct { > > s32 data[4]; /* PM1, PM2P5, PM4, PM10 */ > > - s64 ts; > > + aligned_s64 ts; > Definitely a bug as we have no idea what is next on the stack > so fixes tag needed. Applied with: Fixes: a5bf6fdd19c3 ("iio:chemical:sps30: Fix timestamp alignment") > > > } scan; > > > > mutex_lock(&state->lock); > > >
diff --git a/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c b/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c index 6f4f2ba2c09d5e691df13bc11ca9e3a910d98dc8..a7888146188d09ddbf376b398ee24dab7f0e2611 100644 --- a/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c +++ b/drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ static irqreturn_t sps30_trigger_handler(int irq, void *p) int ret; struct { s32 data[4]; /* PM1, PM2P5, PM4, PM10 */ - s64 ts; + aligned_s64 ts; } scan; mutex_lock(&state->lock);
Follow the pattern of other drivers and use aligned_s64 for the timestamp. This will ensure that the timestamp is correctly aligned on all architectures. Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> --- drivers/iio/chemical/sps30.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)