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:	Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:54:08 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	vegard.nossum@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Fix struct sock bitfield annotation

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 03:07:56 +0200

> Point is we should not lose 8 bytes with kmemcheck on or off.
> I believe kmemcheck macros are fine as they are.
> 
> When we have a structure with
> 
>         unsigned char           sk_shutdown : 2,
>                                 sk_no_check : 2,
>                                 sk_userlocks : 4;
>         unsigned char           sk_protocol;
>         unsigned short          sk_type;
> 
> Its pretty clear its *logically* a bitfield aggregation, or if you prefer :

I think from a practical standpoint, you are right.

But Vegard is right too, as we should be able to put the annotation
right next to the ":" statements.

So if you really want why don't you put the sk_protocol and
sk_type into the ":" block as you mentioned.

And then you can use Arnaldo's 'pahole' instead of the kludgy
offsetof() which doesn't work with bitfields :-)

I want the 8 bytes back just like you, but seperating the annotation
from the real C bitfields looks definitely wrong to me.
--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ