netdev - Re: wireless vs. alignment requirements

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: <1195912176.4149.194.camel@johannes.berg>
Date:	Sat, 24 Nov 2007 14:49:36 +0100
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	dsd@...too.org, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: wireless vs. alignment requirements


On Sat, 2007-11-24 at 21:32 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 09:33:36AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> >
> > We still require four-byte alignment, no?
> 
> Not at all.  If NET_IP_ALIGN is zero then it won't be four-byte
> aligned (since the Ethernet header is 14 bytes long).

Right. I just didn't think that would be a valid value for an
architecture to set.

johannes

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (829 bytes)