netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 8/8] tcp: tsq: move tsq_flags close to sk_wmem

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: <CANn89iKLmzxF+NFurgFRn2yYFAJxi7nbVtkCyadE2Be6x8SR5g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 4 Dec 2016 18:45:42 -0800
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 8/8] tcp: tsq: move tsq_flags close to sk_wmem_alloc

On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 5:37 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:

>
> Sorry, just noticed by visual inspection.  I expected the
> struct sock part to show up in the same patch as the one
> that removed it from tcp_sock and adjusted the users.
>
> I'll re-review this series, thanks.

Yes, I wanted to have after patch 7, the final cache line disposition
of struct sock.
(Quite critical for future bisections if needed, or performance tests
I mentioned)

I could have used a 'unsigned long _temp_padding', but just chose the
final name for the field.

Thanks.