linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/18] Make common x86 arch area for i386 and x86_64

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]

Date:	Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:06:48 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Martin Bligh <mbligh@...igh.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Glauber de Oliveira Costa <glommer@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/18] Make common x86 arch area for i386 and x86_64 - Take 2

> That's *exactly* what the patches do (except it's called "arch/x86", which 
> is clearly the best option - please don't use "ia" _anywhere_ except for 
> "ia64", since that's the only architecture that is really "intel 
> architecture").

And i860 @)

> > On the downside, it's more ../../.. type stuff. On the upside,
> > they're more cleanly separated and it's apparent what's going on.
> > Seems nicer to me than drivers/ and kernel/ for stuff that's
> > really arch specific, but shared between two arches.
> 
> Absolutely. I'm agreeing violently. I just suspect not a lot of people 
> really looked at the patches..

Well I just see a lot of pain from these patches but I doubt 
they will avoid any bugs. If people don't compile test both
archs they will always likely break on another. There are lots
of subtle dependencies that are not expressed in the pathname
even after this intrusive operation (e.g. in the includes).

That's just how it is.

If the architecture merging was ever done it would be likely
by extending arch/x86_64 to support (modern) 32bit. But this
change doesn't bring us any step closer to that goal.

I think it's just aesthetics -- i'm all for aesthetics but only 
if it gives better software and doesn't impact other people who
want to get something real done; neither of this is the case here.

-Andi

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/