netdev - Re: [for-next 07/10] IB/mlx5: Use blue flame register allocator in mlx5

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:   Fri, 6 Jan 2017 08:06:09 +0200
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:     <eli@....mellanox.co.il>, <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        <dledford@...hat.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, <eli@...lanox.com>,
        <matanb@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [for-next 07/10] IB/mlx5: Use blue flame register allocator in
 mlx5_ib

On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 03:07:31PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eli Cohen <eli@....mellanox.co.il>
> Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 14:03:18 -0600
>
> > If necessary I can make sure it builds on 32 bits as well.
>
> Please do.

Dave,

I'm failing to understand the benefits of building mlx5 on 32 bits, and
see only disadvantages:
 * It is actual dead code without test coverage.
 * It misleads reviewers/customers by seeing code for 32 bits.
 * It adds compilation time for 32 bits platforms and "punishes" them
   for not relevant for them driver.

Why do you call removing all that as a "regression"?

 Thanks.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)