| 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: <20110119.134428.71569409.davem@davemloft.net> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:44:28 -0800 (PST) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com Cc: rostedt@...dmis.org, richm@...elvet.org.uk, 609371@...s.debian.org, ben@...adent.org.uk, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, fweisbec@...il.com, mingo@...hat.com Subject: Re: Bug#609371: linux-image-2.6.37-trunk-sparc64: module scsi_mod: Unknown relocation: 36 From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:20:53 -0500 > Now what I'm discussing with David Miller is if creating a > > __long_packed_aligned > > and using it for *both* type and variable alignment would be more palatable (it > also works, and is more compact). As I mentioned in another reply, we should not be using packed. Packed has other implications, which makes it use byte-at-a-time accesses for all parts of a structure when you tag it with 'packed'. GCC doesn't try to be clever and see that actually such accesses are safe. If plain "__long_aligned" works and, since you're tagging it to the structure definition, it only specifies a minimum-alignment, then I'm fine with using that to fix this. -- 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