linux-kernel - Re: [2.6.30-rc8] gcc 3.3 : _

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:	Fri, 5 Jun 2009 11:37:25 +0200
From:	Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
	mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [2.6.30-rc8] gcc 3.3 : __udivdi3 undefined.

On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 12:03:10AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:51:07 +0900 Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
> 
> > >but I wonder why all those things are u64.  They all hold virtual
> > >addresses, don't they?  The code doesn't test highmem.  So shouldn't
> > >these all be unsigned longs?
> > memtest() in linux-2.6.29.4/arch/x86/mm/memtest.c is using "unsigned long".
> > 2.6.30 changed to use "u64" by some reason.
> 
> No reason, really.  "consistency". 

Yes, it was done that way for consistency.
See this thread
  http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/2/13/166

> It made the code slower,

not measurable

> larger

slightly on 32-bit

> and, err, not compile.

Mea culpa.

Overlooked the 64-bit division.
Did test this with 4.[23].x compilers on 32-bit which didn't complain ...

I assume you are going to send your do_div() fix upstream?


Thanks!

Andreas



--
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/