linux-kernel - Re: [patch 8/8] x86: apic

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080815134801.GA14103@elte.hu>
Date:	Fri, 15 Aug 2008 15:48:01 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
Cc:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	hpa@...or.com, yhlu.kernel@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 8/8] x86: apic - unify init_bsp_APIC


* Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@...ux-mips.org> wrote:

> > If that was the question, the answer would be: to unify apic_32.c 
> > and apic_64.c we first use tiny little changes to bring the two 
> > files in sync. Presumably, each such change is a NOP or at least 
> > very safe - and clearly bisectable in the worst-case.
> 
>  If the obfuscation comes from apic_64.c, then the clean-up should be 
> done in th other direction IMO.  Not everything that comes from the 
> 64-bit variation is better than its 32-bit counterpart.

yeah - in fact for most unifications we did the 32-bit counterpart was 
the cleaner one. (which is no big surprise, 80%-90% of the x86 Linux 
use, even today, is on the 32-bit side - so most developers watch that 
one.)

	Ingo
--
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/