linux-kernel - Re: [X86] Remove unnecessary code in 64bit CPU identification.

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: <4834B670.80606@zytor.com>
Date:	Wed, 21 May 2008 16:55:28 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [X86] Remove unnecessary code in 64bit CPU identification.

Dave Jones wrote:
> 
> Moving along the same direction..  Moving the vendor specific bits out of setup_64.c
> into cpu/ would go a long way towards killing of setup64.c.  I took a first pass at doing this
> in the diff below. So far I only looked at the AMD specific bits, and haven't done
> a complete conversion to cpu_dev style initialisation as done on 32bit, but that
> can easily be performed later after moving all the code out into its respective places.
> (downside: a bunch of externs in the interim).
> 
> comments on this before I go any further?
> 

Hi Dave,

I was going to pull this into -tip, but I need a Signed-off-by: line in 
order to do so.  Could you resend this so we can add it to -tip?

	-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/