Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 20:22:04 +0100
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <>, David Miller <>
Cc: David Laight <>, Netdev <>,, Andi Kleen <>,
 LKML <>,
 Linux Crypto Mailing List <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] secure_seq: use siphash24 instead of md5_transform

On 14.12.2016 19:06, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Hi David,
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 6:56 PM, David Miller <> wrote:
>> Just marking the structure __packed, whether necessary or not, makes
>> the compiler assume that the members are not aligned and causes
>> byte-by-byte accesses to be performed for words.
>> Never, _ever_, use __packed unless absolutely necessary, it pessimizes
>> the code on cpus that require proper alignment of types.
> Oh, jimminy cricket, I did not realize that it made assignments
> byte-by-byte *always*. So what options am I left with? What
> immediately comes to mind are:
> 1)
> struct {
>     u64 a;
>     u32 b;
>     u32 c;
>     u16 d;
>     u8 end[];

I don't think this helps. Did you test it? I don't see reason why
padding could be left out between `d' and `end' because of the flexible
array member?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.