linux-kernel - Re: [2.6 patch] asm-generic/int-ll64.h: always provide _

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]

Date:	Mon, 19 May 2008 16:51:53 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
CC:	Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] asm-generic/int-ll64.h: always provide __{s,u}64

Adrian Bunk wrote:
>>>
>> If it is going to be unconditionally offered, we could get rid of
>> __BYTEORDER_HAS_U64__ as a next step.  Unless there is something I've
>> missed.
> 
> Why do we need the byteorder headers in userspace at all?
> 

Because Linux-specific software has depended on them for over 15 years 
(they are a much better API than anything POSIX provides.)  We can't 
just yank them, and so it's better if they actually work.

Yes, you can argue it should be glibc's job to provide them, but well, 
why duplicate work when we already have a nicely working set.

	-hpa
--
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/