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]

Date:	Sat, 24 Nov 2007 12:11:08 -0800
From:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>, dsd@...too.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: wireless vs. alignment requirements

Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 02:49:36PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
>   
>> Right. I just didn't think that would be a valid value for an
>> architecture to set.
>>     
>
> OK.  Let me clarify this a bit more.  We require at least one
> of the following rules to be met:
>
> * the IPv4/IPv6 header is aligned by 8 bytes on reception;
> * or the platform provides unaligned exception handlers.
>
> So if your platform violates both rules then it won't work with
> the IP stack, simple as that.  Fortunately I don't think such a
> platform exists currently on Linux.
>
> Cheers,
>   

Then what about hardware that can't dma ethernet to non-aligned address.
Sky2 hardware breaks if DMA is not 8 byte aligned.  IMHO the IP stack should
handle any alignment, and do the appropriate memove if the CPU requires 
alignment.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html