linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] kernel: Move arches to use common unaligned access

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 11 Apr 2008 03:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	dhowells@...hat.com
Cc:	harvey.harrison@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] kernel: Move arches to use common unaligned access

From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:11:28 +0100

> Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > - * impractical.  So, now we fall back to using memcpy.
> > + * impractical.  So, now we fall back to using memmov.
> 
> That's memmove, not memmov.  Any why memmove, not memcpy?  Is __tmp likely to
> overlap with *ptr?

No, I think it has something to do with what cases GCC is allowed to
optimize the call inline and what cases it cannot wrt.  alignment of
datums.
--
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/