linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration

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: <5d6222a80712190415q7921b244ua073a8c64ab30597@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:15:26 -0200
From:	"Glauber de Oliveira Costa" <glommer@...il.com>
To:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	"Glauber de Oliveira Costa" <gcosta@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de, ehabkost@...hat.com, jeremy@...p.org,
	avi@...ranet.com, anthony@...emonkey.ws,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	ak@...e.de, chrisw@...s-sol.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	hpa@...or.com, zach@...are.com, roland@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration

On Dec 19, 2007 8:17 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> * Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > What's left in processor_32.h and processor_64.h cannot be cleanly
> > integrated. However, it's just a couple of definitions. They are moved
> > to processor.h around ifdefs, and the original files are deleted. Note
> > that there's much less headers included in the final version.
>
> hm, doesnt apply;
>
>  Applying patch patches/x86-finish-processor-h-integration.patch
>  patching file include/asm-x86/processor.h
>  Hunk #2 FAILED at 287.
>  Hunk #3 FAILED at 311.
>  Hunk #4 succeeded at 786 (offset -8 lines).
>  2 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- rejects in file include/asm-x86/processor.h
>
> i fixed it up by hand - the result is below - does it look OK to you?
> (Also, could you check latest x86.git whether i've picked up all your
> patches correctly - the reject might be indicative of some missing
> pieces.)

Your fix is okay. The other patches seems to be all there. The reason
for this is that
it conflicts with Roland's (welcome) i387 patches.


-- 
Glauber de Oliveira Costa.
"Free as in Freedom"
http://glommer.net

"The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act."
--
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/