linux-kernel - Re: [Slightly off topic] A question about R/B trees.

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:	Mon, 20 Oct 2008 08:54:44 -0600
From:	"Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>
To:	Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>
CC:	Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Slightly off topic] A question about R/B trees.

Maxim Levitsky wrote:

> Say you allocate a piece of memory using kmalloc, and write there, a
> structure that contains a r/b tree item. I agree that gcc will ensure
> that offset from start of that structure to first byte of the tree
> item will be aligned.
> 
> But what if malloc returned a misaligned pointer? This will ensure
> that virtual address of the tree item won't be aligned. (I know it
> doesn't, but this isn't a assumption about gcc anymore)

malloc() can't return a misaligned pointer.  From the spec:  "The 
pointer returned if the allocation succeeds shall be suitably aligned so 
that it may be assigned to a pointer to any type of object..."

Chris
--
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/