linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 00/10] tools: Revamp the unaligned endian access functions

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 13 Jun 2014 22:04:05 +0200
From:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/10] tools: Revamp the unaligned endian access
 functions

> > 
> > A much simpler approach without any fallback to arch specific
> > version etc. is everything we need.
> 
> It doesn't matter so much for things that are just done for the kernel
> compile, no, but there are some tools that are built to be used as
> standalone things, and it could matter there.
Which tools require 452 lines of codes for a simple set of
le/be wrappers?
In other words - which tool will benefit from the addition speedup
this amount of code gives?

If I as a naive user look in unaligned.h I do not even see
a prototype of the available methods. I am thrown to a directory
with no less than 12 files.

The le_direct.h´+ be_direct.h files seems unused.

So again - why is it not enaough to provide only le_byteshift.h
+ the be counterpart?

	Sam
--
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/