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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20160923.224305.942077200829435690.davem@davemloft.net> Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 22:43:05 -0400 (EDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: eric@...int.com Cc: edumazet@...gle.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk, fugang.duan@....com, troy.kisky@...ndarydevices.com, otavio@...ystems.com.br, cjb.sw.nospam@...il.com Subject: Re: Alignment issues with freescale FEC driver From: Eric Nelson <eric@...int.com> Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:33:29 -0700 > Since the hardware requires longword alignment for its' DMA transfers, > aligning the IP header will require a memcpy, right? I wish hardware designers didn't do this. There is no conflict between DMA alignment and properly offseting the packet data by two bytes. All hardware designers have to do is allow 2 padding bytes to be emitted by the chip before the actual packet data. Then the longword or whatever DMA transfer alignment is met whilst still giving the necessary flexibility for where the packet data lands.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists