netdev - Re: [Patch net-next 3/7] inetpeer: use generic union inet

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: <1374550695.24933.19.camel@cr0>
Date:	Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:38:15 +0800
From:	Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next 3/7] inetpeer: use generic union inet_addr

On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 19:26 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> You are sending a patch with possible performance impact, and you only
> says "its safe", without any real study. It might have an impact, who
> knows.
> 
> I said "its no big deal", so consider this as an informative message. 

Yeah.

So changing from struct inetpeer_addr to union inet_addr just adds few
bytes (8 bytes if I don't make mistake) to struct tcp_metrics_block,
therefore should not cause performance issue on 32bit and 64bit?

BTW, I tried to use pahole to get the offsets of these fields, but it
doesn't work for me.

Thanks!

--
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