netdev - Re: [PATCHv3 net-next 3/4] sctp: add support for generating stream reconf add incoming/outgoing streams request chunk

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20170123.110047.447365739282173577.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Mon, 23 Jan 2017 11:00:47 -0500 (EST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     marcelo.leitner@...il.com
Cc:     David.Laight@...LAB.COM, lucien.xin@...il.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org,
        nhorman@...driver.com, vyasevich@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 net-next 3/4] sctp: add support for generating stream
 reconf add incoming/outgoing streams request chunk

From: "'Marcelo Ricardo Leitner'" <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:36:28 -0200

> So, no padding. A field just after the other, which is what we want on a
> network header.

It isn't necessary!

Show me a case where it is required when you use properly fixed sized
types and a proper ordering of the struct members.  No padding is
going in there, go and check.

Do we splatter __packed all over our ipv4/ipv6 header, TCP header, UDP
header, etc. structures?  No, we don't because it's totally unecessary.

I will not accept __packed being used unless it is absolutely, provably,
the only way to solve a particular problem.  And when that does happen,
I am going to require a huge comment explaining in detail why this is
the case, and why no other approach or solution solved the problem.