linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/9] conditionally define generic get_order() (ARCH_HAS_GET

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: <1defaf580608311141j39aa87e5ldf80db1db54b2edf@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 31 Aug 2006 20:41:04 +0200
From:	"Haavard Skinnemoen" <hskinnemoen@...il.com>
To:	"Dave Hansen" <haveblue@...ibm.com>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/9] conditionally define generic get_order() (ARCH_HAS_GET_ORDER)

On 8/31/06, Dave Hansen <haveblue@...ibm.com> wrote:
> diff -puN mm/Kconfig~generic-get_order mm/Kconfig
> --- threadalloc/mm/Kconfig~generic-get_order    2006-08-30 15:14:56.000000000 -0700
> +++ threadalloc-dave/mm/Kconfig 2006-08-30 15:15:00.000000000 -0700
> @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
> +config ARCH_HAVE_GET_ORDER
> +       def_bool y
> +       depends on IA64 || PPC32 || XTENSA
> +

I have a feeling this has been discussed before, but wouldn't it be
better to let each architecture define this in its own Kconfig?

At some point, I have to add AVR32 to that list, and if one or more
other architectures need to do the same, there will be rejects.

Haavard
-
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/