From: Herbert Xu Subject: Re: x86-64: Maintain 16-byte stack alignment Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 16:38:41 +0800 Message-ID: <20170113083841.GB22022@gondor.apana.org.au> References: <20170111043541.GA4944@gondor.apana.org.au> <20170112140215.rh247gwk55fjzmg7@treble> <20170112201511.yj5ekqmj76r2yv6t@treble> <20170112205504.gb6z2w52mektyc73@treble> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Josh Poimboeuf , Andy Lutomirski , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Crypto Mailing List , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Andy Lutomirski , Ard Biesheuvel To: Linus Torvalds Return-path: Received: from helcar.hengli.com.au ([209.40.204.226]:33827 "EHLO helcar.apana.org.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751226AbdAMIjM (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jan 2017 03:39:12 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 01:40:54PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > The 8-byte alignment mainly makes sense when the basic call sequence > just adds 8 bytes, and you have functions without frames (that still > call other functions). The question is does it really make sense to save those 8 bytes of padding on x86-64 when arm64 apparently also requires 16-byte stack alignment. Cheers, -- Email: Herbert Xu Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt