[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20161214.125612.1361254098267633173.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 12:56:12 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: Jason@...c4.com
Cc: David.Laight@...lab.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] secure_seq: use siphash24 instead of
md5_transform
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 13:53:10 +0100
> In all current uses of __packed in the code, I think the impact is
> precisely zero, because all structures have members in descending
> order of size, with each member being a perfect multiple of the one
> below it. The __packed is therefore just there for safety, in case
> somebody comes in and screws everything up by sticking a u8 in
> between.
Just marking the structure __packed, whether necessary or not, makes
the compiler assume that the members are not aligned and causes
byte-by-byte accesses to be performed for words.
Never, _ever_, use __packed unless absolutely necessary, it pessimizes
the code on cpus that require proper alignment of types.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
