linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) instead of removing the packed attribute

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 Jun 2011 16:28:49 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Alexander Holler <holler@...oftware.de>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
	gregkh@...e.de, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) instead of removing the
 packed attribute

On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> On Monday 20 June 2011 19:39:34 Alexander Holler wrote:
> > That packed without an additional aligned() caused errors on ARM with 
> > gcc 4.6 is another problem which got (currently) fixed by removing packed.
> 
> Packed caused errors because it is *wrong*. The code as it was used undefined
> behavior in the language.

I wouldn't call this issue as such, but this is a Red herring.

Could you please provide a pointer to the structure definition so a 
second opinion to the usefulness of __packed there could be provided?  
If it is not matching any of the fairly limited cases where having 
__packed is relevant then we can just confirm that it should go.


Nicolas
--
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/