linux-kernel - Re: [regressions] Re: kbuild: save ARCH & CROSS

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: <20091011213546.GB2768@merkur.ravnborg.org>
Date:	Sun, 11 Oct 2009 23:35:46 +0200
From:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: [regressions] Re: kbuild: save ARCH & CROSS_COMPILE when
	building a kernel

On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 11:26:48AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 12:34:41PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > 
> > > Sam,
> > > 
> > > that arch-cache thing introduced in:
> > > 
> > >  5755433: kbuild: save ARCH & CROSS_COMPILE when building a kernel
> > > 
> > > isnt working very well in my experience.
> > > 
> > > 1) it's a nuisance in cross-builds (it broke several cross-build scripts 
> > >    of mine)
> >
> > On the contrary it has helped me big time on my cross builds. [...]
> 
> Could you please try to do that without hurting the existing scripting 
> and existing workflow of other people?

The only message in the above was that this was also beneficial
to some - and not a nusiance only.

> 
> > No need to script is all to remember to set the correct ARCH + 
> > CROSS_COMPILE settings.
> 
> Then put your new state into the .config instead of this stupid 
> include/generated/ extra state that is a _big_ regression over v2.6.31 
> in terms of cross-build usability.

I cannot see why saving this in include/generated/*
has anything to do with your complains. I guess you did not look
at the patch in question.

What is hurting you and several other users are _not_ related
to the fact that we save ARCH and CROSS_COMPILE setting or where
we save it.
What hurt you is the consistency checks that was added
to try to catch people in doing something unexpected.

Unexpected like trying to build a 64 bit kernel where they
previosuly were building a 32 bit kernel.
Or when they suddenly used a different set of binutils
because they changed CROSS_COMPILE settings.

The patch in question is reverted in my next push to Linus.
This is not an argument about that.
This is solely an argument about why it had this negative
impact for you and others.

[PS - mails had not been ignored. Other stuff just had higher
priority]

	Sam
--
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/