linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] byteorder: eliminate pointer bytorder api

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:	Tue, 20 May 2008 14:17:31 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	harvey.harrison@...il.com
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] byteorder: eliminate pointer bytorder api

From: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 12:24:09 -0700

> Not a great api, should be using cpu_to_etc and deref the pointer yourself.
> cpu_to_le16p
> cpu_to_le32p
> cpu_to_le64p
> cpu_to_be16p
> cpu_to_be32p
> cpu_to_be64p
> 
> Replaced by the aligned get_/put_ helpers
> le16_to_cpup
> le32_to_cpup
> le64_to_cpup
> be16_to_cpup
> be32_to_cpup
> be64_to_cpup
> 
> Also add const to the get/put helpers and use them in the access_ok case for
> unaligned access.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>

But what you're doing in the first patch is killing performance for some
cases.

The reason we use the cpu_to_*p() interfaces is to get the other-endian
load and store instructions some processors have.

What you're doing is undoing all of that work we've done to take
advantage of such things.
--
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/