linux-kernel - Re: [patch 04/14] ia64: Remove the __SMALL_ADDR

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: <ed5aea430711271310i144c005cj25101b7dd6b0d6d9@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:10:21 -0700
From:	"David Mosberger-Tang" <dmosberger@...il.com>
To:	"Christoph Lameter" <clameter@....com>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, tony.luck@...el.com
Subject: Re: [patch 04/14] ia64: Remove the __SMALL_ADDR_AREA attribute for per cpu access

On 11/27/07, Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, David Mosberger-Tang wrote:
>
> > On 11/26/07, Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote:
> > > The model(small) attribute is not supported by gcc 4.X. The tests
> > > will always be negative today.
> >
> > What was the rationale for removing this attribute?
>
> The code is then similar across all architectures and can be moved into
> generic code.

Uniformity for the sake of uniformity?  The small data addressing is
really elegant and I don't think it should be dropped just for the
sake of uniformity.

  --david
-
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/