[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190110222928.GB22416@darkstar.musicnaut.iki.fi>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 00:29:28 +0200
From: Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@....fi>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
keyrings@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bug report: unaligned access with ext4 encryption
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 05:28:02PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org> wrote:
> > Hi Aaro, thanks for the bug report! I think you're on the right track; it makes
> > much more sense to have the keyrings subsystem store the payload with better
> > alignment, than to work around the 2-byte alignment in fscrypt.
> >
> > But how about '__aligned(__alignof__(u64))' instead? 4 bytes may not be enough.
> >
> > David, what do you think?
>
> Does that even work?
That should work.
> Might be better to just insert 6 bytes of padding with a comment, but yes I
> agree that it's probably better to align it to at least machine word size.
Padding is fragile, e.g. if struct rcu_head changes. Using __aligned should
make it always right automatically.
A.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists