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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 18:30:38 +0800 From: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@...il.com> To: James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com> CC: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>, 'Dan Carpenter' <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>, "devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>, "andreas.dilger@...el.com" <andreas.dilger@...el.com>, Antonio Quartulli <antonio@...hcoding.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "bergwolf@...il.com" <bergwolf@...il.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, "oleg.drokin@...el.com" <oleg.drokin@...el.com>, "jacques-charles.lafoucriere@....fr" <jacques-charles.lafoucriere@....fr>, "jinshan.xiong@...el.com" <jinshan.xiong@...el.com>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-metag@...r.kernel.org" <linux-metag@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: staging: lustre: lustre: include: add "__attribute__((packed))" for the related union On 02/03/2014 06:22 PM, James Hogan wrote: > On 03/02/14 10:05, David Laight wrote: >> From: Dan Carpenter >>> On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 09:57:39PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote: >>>> It seems, our kernel still stick to treate 'pack' region have effect >>>> with both 'align' and 'sizeof'. >>> >>> It's not about packed regions. It's about unions. It's saying the >>> sizeof() a union is a multiple of 4 unless it's packed. >>> >>> union foo { >>> short x; >>> short y; >>> }; >>> >>> The author intended the sizeof(union foo) to be 2 but on metag arch then >>> it is 4. >> >> The same is probably be true of: struct foo { _u16 bar; }; > > Yes indeed. > >> Architectures that define such alignment rules are a right PITA. >> You either need to get the size to 2 without using 'packed', or >> just not define such structures. >> It is worth seeing if adding aligned(2) will change the size - I'm >> not sure. > > __aligned(2) alone doesn't seem to have any effect on sizeof() or > __alignof__() unless it is accompanied by __packed. x86_64 is similar in > that respect (it just packs sanely in the first place). > > Combining __packed with __aligned(2) does the trick though (__packed > alone sets __aligned(1) which is obviously going to be suboptimal). > Oh, thank you for your explanation. And hope this feature issue can be fixed, and satisfy both kernel and ABI. :-) Thanks. -- Chen Gang Open, share and attitude like air, water and life which God blessed -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists