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: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 16:26:30 +1100 From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au> To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org> Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11 v3] enable "make ARCH=x86" On Saturday 10 November 2007 18:54, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 10:23:23PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > >This is the patch that get rid of ARCH=i386 and ARCH=x86_64 > > >and introduce ARCH=x86. > > >It touches several files but the changes are all one or two-liners. > > > > > > x86: drop backward compatibility symlinks to i386/boot and > > > x86_64/boot > > > kbuild: sanity check the specified arch > > > > IMO it negatives impacts the workflow when you -remove- the ability to > > set 32/64-bit on the make command line. > > > > Building and testing for both architectures now requires the additional > > step of editing .config, which is a clear workflow negative impact at > > least for me. > > When it was decided to unify i386 and x86_64 it was at the same time > decided to handle them as a *single* architecture. > > Keeping ARCH=i386 and ARCH=x86_64 around is just a way to pretend > this is two diffrent architectures which is no longer the case. > > Do we need a way to say "build a kernel that is 64 bit"? > If we need this then we should look at the most intuitive way > to say so and this should work across x86, powerpc and s390. > > make 64BIT=y ARCH=x86 > > looks so much more intuitive. And it is generic. > This is just a proposal. > > But lets focus on finding a generic solution and not try > to hang around in old habbits. I agree. So long as you can do it easily on the commandline, it's no problem, and we should be consistent (in calling the arch x86). - 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