linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/11 v3] enable "make ARCH=x86"

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: <200711101626.31500.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
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/