Hi,
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 03:01:14PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 12:29:28AM +0200, Aaro Koskinen wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 05:28:02PM +, David Howells wrote:
> > > Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > > Hi Aaro, thanks for the bug report! I think you're
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 12:29:28AM +0200, Aaro Koskinen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 05:28:02PM +, David Howells wrote:
> > Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > Hi Aaro, thanks for the bug report! I think you're on the right track;
> > > it makes
> > > much more sense to have the keyrings
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 05:28:02PM +, David Howells wrote:
> Eric Biggers wrote:
> > Hi Aaro, thanks for the bug report! I think you're on the right track; it
> > makes
> > much more sense to have the keyrings subsystem store the payload with better
> > alignment, than to work around th
Eric Biggers wrote:
> Hi Aaro, thanks for the bug report! I think you're on the right track; it
> makes
> much more sense to have the keyrings subsystem store the payload with better
> alignment, than to work around the 2-byte alignment in fscrypt.
>
> But how about '__aligned(__alignof__(u64)
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 06:29:06PM +0200, Aaro Koskinen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When using ext4 encryption on SPARC, there's plenty of dmesg noise about
> unaligned access:
>
> [ 167.269526] Kernel unaligned access at TPC[5497a0]
> find_and_lock_process_key+0x80/0x120
> [ 167.270152] Kernel unaligned
5 matches
Mail list logo
