linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ubi: kill homegrown endian macros

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: <1179540463.2859.627.camel@shinybook.infradead.org>
Date:	Sat, 19 May 2007 10:07:42 +0800
From:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To:	Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc:	Matthieu CASTET <castet.matthieu@...e.fr>,
	"John Anthony Kazos Jr." <jakj@...-k-j.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ubi: kill homegrown endian macros

On Sat, 2007-05-19 at 00:00 +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> It's not the compiler who decides -- struct layout is
> dictated by the ABI you're compiling for.

This is true in the case of externally-visible stuff. I think the
compiler is permitted to violate the ABI for purely unit-internal things
if it makes sense though, isn't it?

Besides, in the case of the Linux kernel the ABI in question could be
one of many. It could even be a new one which was added a couple of
weeks ago, and which I had no _chance_ of considering.

The rule stands -- empirical testing of what the compiler will do isn't
usually the right answer.

-- 
dwmw2

-
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/