linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lightnvm: change max_phys

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]

Message-ID: <5644E2F5.707@bjorling.me>
Date:	Thu, 12 Nov 2015 20:05:25 +0100
From:	Matias Bjørling <m@...rling.me>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lightnvm: change max_phys_sect to ushort

On 11/12/2015 08:02 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Matias Bjørling <m@...rling.me> wrote:
>>
>> Grah, I need to be more careful. I sent the wrong patch after I had fixed it
>> to unsigned short.
>
> Actually, I think "unsigned int" was better.
>
> You're not saving any space with "unsigned short" (the size of the
> structure will be rounded up to the alignment of it anyway), and we
> should generally strive to avoid 16-bit accesses unless there is some
> real reason for them, because they are often slower than either "char"
> or "int". Several architectures have weak support for 16-bit accesses
> (eg alpha), and even on x86 you end up having operand size overrides
> etc.
>

Thanks

> So unless there is a clear *reason* to use "short" - just don't.
>
>                     Linus
>

--
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/