| 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: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 21:38:10 +0100 From: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: x86 merge - a little feedback > In the filename there is NOTHING for most of > the non-shared code that tell that this file is > used by only i386 or x86_64. Exactly my point from KS. The big mash-up will not really make much difference in terms of Makefile clarity or whatever Thomas' point was. Apparently he wanted to eliminate a few lines of code from the Makefile and merge the header files completely? Anyways, the end result will be roughly the same as it is now: i386 and x86-64 are shared in not completely obvious ways and if you change one you have to test compile the other too. Same old, same old, as always. > I dunno if this will address the concern of Andi about mixing i386 and > x86_64 but to me at least things would be so much more obvious if the > original relationship are spelled out. In the end it won't make much difference where the files are located (although I frankly don't see the advantage of this intrusive move). You always have to at least compile test both if you change one and I doubt most people will be able to avoid this no matter how the Makefile looks or where the files are. Even if everything was merged together and only ifdefs remained that fundamental fact would not change either. A few more files could be also definitely shared, no argument. e.g. the time subsystem will likely to be shared soon anyways. And probably a few others. That should be better all done carefully step by step and properly reviewed though, not in some kind of brutal "rewrite the world" event. My concern is mostly that he seems to want to merge some things between 32bit and 64bit (like the APIC drivers or the crappy i386 maze-of-inlines subarchitecture design) which ought not be together. I think I managed to keep x86-64 a relatively clean port over-all, but I see this now going down the drain :/ -Andi - 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