linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: relocs is only used with 32bit

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <49BAECE6.7060009@zytor.com>
Date:	Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:31:50 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: relocs is only used with 32bit

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> In general I prefer minimizing the conditional sections rather than
>> maximizing them.  If nothing else, it catches errors earlier that way,
>> and makes it easier to eventually eliminate them entirely.
> 
> Makes sense.  Although in this case that rule appears like it
> can't even execute on x86_64.
> 

That's fine.  This is the same reason why it's better to have
if () { ... } than #ifdef as long as the condition can be statically 
determined -- at least this way make will complain about a syntax error.

	-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/