linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean

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]

Message-ID: <44D39735.8010909@zytor.com>
Date:	Fri, 04 Aug 2006 11:51:33 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>
CC:	Andreas Schwab <schwab@...e.de>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean

Jes Sorensen wrote:
>
>> That's how the ABI is defined.
> 
> That the ABI for long long or the ABI for uint64_t? Given that u64 is a
> Linux thing, it ought to be ok to do the alignment the right way within
> the kernel.
> 

And what will break if you make that switch?

	-hpa
-
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/