| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4960068A.3040109@shaw.ca> Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2009 18:44:58 -0600 From: Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: PATCH [0/3]: Simplify the kernel build by removing perl. Rob Landley wrote: > For the record, the reason I can't just pregenerate all these suckers on a > system that's got an arbitrary precision calculator (ala dc) and then just > ship the resulting header files (more or less the what the first version of > that first patch did) is that some architectures (arm omap and and arm at91) > allow you to enter arbitrary HZ values in kconfig. (Their help text says that > in many cases values that aren't powers of two won't work, but nothing > enforces this.) So if we didn't have the capability to dynamically generate > these, you could enter a .config value that would break the build. Is there a good reason that these archs allow you enter arbitrary HZ values? The use case for using custom HZ values at all nowadays seems fairly low now that dynticks is around (if that arch supports it anyway), let alone being able to specify wierd obscure values for it. Especially if nothing can ensure that all values it allows will actually result in a functional kernel.. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists