linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean

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]

Message-Id: <1154709025.23655.246.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:30:24 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>
Cc:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean

Ar Gwe, 2006-08-04 am 17:58 +0200, ysgrifennodd Jes Sorensen:
> > You don't use bool for talking to hardware, you use it for the most
> > efficient compiler behaviour when working with true/false values.
> 
> Thats the problem, people will start putting them into structs, and
> voila all alignment predictability has gone out the window.

Jes, try reading as well as writing. Given you even quoted "You don't
use bool for talking to hardware" maybe you should read it.

Structure alignment is generally a bad idea anyway because even array
and word alignment are pretty variable between processors.


-
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/