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: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6DCFFE7192@AcuExch.aculab.com> Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 12:40:28 +0000 From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM> To: 'Gavin Shan' <gwshan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> CC: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "joe@...ches.com" <joe@...ches.com>, "kubakici@...pl" <kubakici@...pl>, "f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>, "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net> Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 net-next 04/10] net/ncsi: Ethtool operation to get NCSI topology From: Gavin Shan > Sent: 08 May 2017 01:20 ... > >Why 16 bits? > >You are just making life hard for the compiler and possibly generating > >random padding. > > > > It's because there are 256 NCSI channels to maximal degree. So 16-bits > is the minial data width to hold it in signed format. Yes, I think > __s32 would be better in this case. However, I would like to discard > the negotiation mechanism in next respin. Just because the domain of a value fits in 16 bits doesn't mean that a 16bit type is appropriate. It is generally much better to use 32 (aka machine word) sized items unless you have an array or are trying to fit a lot of items into a small memory area. David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists