| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 15:26:26 -0700 From: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com> To: Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com> Cc: Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>, ink@...assic.park.msu.ru, Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>, "dhowells@...hat.com" <dhowells@...hat.com>, "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, yasutake.koichi@...panasonic.com, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>, linux-am33-list@...hat.com, Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [Suggestion] arch/*/include/asm/bitops.h: about __set_bit() API. On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 3:08 AM, Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com> wrote: > using 'unsigned int *', implicitly: > ./ia64/include/asm/bitops.h:63:__set_bit (int nr, volatile void *addr) There is some downside on ia64 to your suggestion. If "addr" is properly aligned for an "int", but misaligned for a long ... i.e. addr%8 == 4, then I'll take an unaligned reference trap if I work with long* where the current code working with int* does not. Now perhaps all the callers do guarantee long* alignment? But I don't know. Apart from uniformity, there doesn't see to be any upside to changing this. -Tony Luck -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists