netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next] tls: Add opt-in zerocopy mode of sendfile()

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: <3f5f17a11d294781a5e500b3903aa902@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Wed, 4 May 2022 09:49:13 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Maxim Mikityanskiy' <maximmi@...dia.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Boris Pismenny <borisp@...dia.com>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
        Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next] tls: Add opt-in zerocopy mode of sendfile()

> > If you declare the union on the stack in the callers, and pass by value
> > - is the compiler not going to be clever enough to still DDRT?
> 
> Ah, OK, it should do the thing. I thought you wanted me to ditch the
> union altogether.

Some architectures always pass struct/union by address.
Which is probably not what you had in mind.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)