| 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
| ||
|
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, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?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