linux-kernel - Re: {PATCH] fix __packed in exported kernel headers

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Thu, 30 Jun 2011 14:58:25 -0400
From:	Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Nick Bowler <nbowler@...iptictech.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
	Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@...ia.com>
Subject: Re: {PATCH] fix __packed in exported kernel headers

On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 14:52, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 06/30/2011 11:48 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> without fallback logic (#ifndef xxx...#define xxx...#endif), i think
>> that's throwing an unreasonable amount of requirements onto userspace
>> consumers
>
> Unclear.  Too much "smarts" in kernel headers is a constant headache to
> userspace consumers.

not even being able to include a header without hitting a build
failure without first declaring some magic defines (which,
realistically, the vast majority of people will be doing exactly the
same as they'll be using gcc) is unreasonable.  hence my suggestion
about compiler.h.
-mike
--
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/