[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m1lkgdiwdx.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:02:02 -0600
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Michael McConnell <soruk@...dani.co.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> writes:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C,
>>> though. I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way.
>>
>> That would require a new compiler, right? I don't think that would
>> make users very happy.
>>
>> Besides the code is not exactly that maintenance intensive and only
>> changes rarely so I don't need a pressing need to rewrite it
>
> No, it would not need a new compiler. All it requires is gcc plus a
> reasonably recent binutils which you need anyway.
There opportunities to enhance this code without writing it in C.
Such as building the code out comprehensible single of subroutines,
with a well defined calling sequence.
The big benefit when you can go to C is that you can include headers
from elsewhere in the kernel and since setup.S is increasingly
becoming optional it has a fixed interface to the rest of
the kernel, so there is much less opportunity for enhancement there.
Eric
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists