linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] fpga: dfl: change data type of feature id to u16

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: <20200813090409.GA1080@yilunxu-OptiPlex-7050>
Date:   Thu, 13 Aug 2020 17:04:09 +0800
From:   Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...el.com>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc:     'Moritz Fischer' <mdf@...nel.org>,
        "linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "trix@...hat.com" <trix@...hat.com>,
        "lgoncalv@...hat.com" <lgoncalv@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] fpga: dfl: change data type of feature id to u16

On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 08:28:05AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Xu Yilun
> > Sent: 13 August 2020 08:59
> > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 08:52:39AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > > From: Moritz Fischer
> > > > Sent: 12 August 2020 04:56
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 10:41:10AM +0800, Xu Yilun wrote:
> > > > > The feature id is stored in a 12 bit field in DFH. So a u16 variable is
> > > > > enough for feature id.
> > > > >
> > > > > This patch changes all feature id related places to fit u16.
> > >
> > > How much bigger does it make the kernel?
> > 
> > The patch changes the definition of feature id from u64 to u16, and will
> > make the kernel slightly smaller.
> 
> Unlikely.
> Most of the structures will gain a 'pad' field.
> Using u16 for function parameters and results almost certainly
> requires instructions to mask the value.
> Any arithmetic on u16 will require masking instructions on
> (probably) all architectures except x86.
> 
> Using 'unsigned int' is probably best.
> 
> u16 is never a good idea unless you are defining enough
> of them in a structure (eg as an array) to reduce the
> structure size below some threshold.
> (Or are matching some hardware layout.)

I got it. Thanks for your detailed explanation. I think we may change them to
u32. Is it the same case for u8? Think we may also change the dfl_device_id.type.


Hi Moritz:

The patch is applied to for-next, is it possible we recall it, or we
make another fix after it?

Thanks,
Yilun.

> 
> 	David
> 
> -
> Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
> Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)