| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <49941C4A.4050401@panasas.com> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 14:55:38 +0200 From: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com> To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org> CC: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: get/put unaligned helpers Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > >> Speaking of which. When all this is done do you intend to also export >> the unaligned.h headers to user-mode just like the aligned Endian helpers? >> >> That could help in a couple of projects, so you have my vote. > > Why would you need that? GCC provides a portable, platform-independent > way. It has had it for ten years at the very least. > Do you mean the __built_in_swabXX() and all these guys. I was under the impression they need to be aligned because otherwise that means something is done wrong. Because the aligned version on lots of CPUs is one instruction where unaligned access is better, or must, be emulated (byte accessed). Assembly wise the two accesses are different and sometimes the compiler has no way to know, where the programmer can know for sure. But I like to be educated any day, please explain what to use when. > Maciej Thanks Boaz -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists