netdev - Re: wireless vs. alignment requirements

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, 29 Nov 2007 09:50:35 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>, dsd@...too.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: wireless vs. alignment requirements

Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 09:16:07AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> I wrote a patch for the IP stack to realign packets if necessary at one 
>> point.  I should dredge it up again and submit it for collective flamage.
> 
> As long as it doesn't penalise Ethernet (e.g., the 10Gb crowd :) it would
> be good to have.
> 
> Thanks,

Uhm, most cards affected *ARE* Ethernet cards, due to the bloody 14-byte 
header.

But it doesn't affect architectures which have alignment, and the cost 
of scanning a properly-aligned packet is minimal.

I'll try to find it some time today.

	-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html