linux-kernel - Re: [RFC net-next 1/1] idpf: Don't hard code napi

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Zv68Q4ur4-ZVTmaL@LQ3V64L9R2>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2024 08:46:11 -0700
From: Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>
To: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
	Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	"moderated list:INTEL ETHERNET DRIVERS" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 1/1] idpf: Don't hard code napi_struct size

On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 03:35:54PM +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
[...]
> napi_struct is the only generic struct whichs size is hardcoded in the
> macros (struct dim is already sizeof()ed, as well as cpumask_var_t), so
> I'm fine with the change you proposed in your first RFC -- I mean
> 
>  libeth_cacheline_set_assert(struct idpf_q_vector, 112,
> -			    424 + 2 * sizeof(struct dim),
> +			    24 + sizeof(struct napi_struct) +
> +			    2 * sizeof(struct dim),
>  			    8 + sizeof(cpumask_var_t));

So you are saying to drop the other #defines I added in the RFC and
just embed a sizeof? I just want to be clear so that I send a v2
that'll be correct.