linux-kernel - Re: + unaligned-introduce-common-header.patch added to -mm tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:21:48 +0100 (CET)
From:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	mm-commits@...r.kernel.org, harvey.harrison@...il.com,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	bryan.wu@...log.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	dhowells@...hat.com, Greg Ungerer <gerg@...inux.org>,
	grundler@...isc-linux.org, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com,
	hskinnemoen@...el.com, ink@...assic.park.msu.ru, kyle@...artin.ca,
	lethal@...ux-sh.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
	Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>, rth@...ddle.net,
	schwidefsky@...ibm.com, takata@...ux-m32r.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	tony.luck@...el.com, ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp,
	zankel@...silica.com, Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Linux Kernel Development <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: + unaligned-introduce-common-header.patch added to -mm tree

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, akpm@...ux-foundation.org wrote:
> Subject: unaligned: introduce common header
> From: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
> 
> There are two common cases in the kernel, one where unaligned access is OK
> for an arch and one where the arch uses a packed-struct for the native
> endianness and opencoded C byteshifting for the other endianness. 
> Consolidate these two implementations in asm-generic/unaligned.h
> 
> Arches that require no special handling of unaligned access can define
> _UNALIGNED_ACCESS_OK in their asm/unaligned.h before including the generic
> version.
> 
> +static inline void __put_le32_noalign(u8 *p, u32 val)
> +{
> +	__put_le16_noalign(p + 2, val >> 16);
> +	__put_le16_noalign(p, val);

Isn't it more logical to reverse the order, to store in increasing memory
locations:

	__put_le16_noalign(p, val);
	__put_le16_noalign(p + 2, val >> 16);

> +}
> +
> +static inline void __put_le64_noalign(u8 *p, u64 val)
> +{
> +	__put_le32_noalign(p + 4, val >> 32);
> +	__put_le32_noalign(p, val);

Same here:

	__put_le32_noalign(p, val);
	__put_le32_noalign(p + 4, val >> 32);

> +}

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
							    -- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/