linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] Unicore architecture patch review, part 2

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: <005f01cb9a95$74e30230$5ea90690$@mprc.pku.edu.cn>
Date:	Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:14:50 +0800
From:	"Guan Xuetao" <guanxuetao@...c.pku.edu.cn>
To:	"'Arnd Bergmann'" <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	<linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Unicore architecture patch review, part 2



> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-arch-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:linux-arch-owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Arnd Bergmann
> Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 9:11 PM
> To: Guan Xuetao
> Cc: linux-arch@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unicore architecture patch review, part 2
> 
> On Thursday 09 December 2010, Guan Xuetao wrote:
> > > Did I misunderstand you or did you make up your mind since then?
> > >
> > We do define new 32-bit ABI work at present, and I will use generic unistd
> > in new ABI.
> > But existing machines must be maintained, so many codes need remain
> > compatibility.
> 
> Ok, I see.
> 
> I would suggest a slightly different approach here as a compromise:
> 
> Make a patch that contains the difference between the backwards-compatible
> and the new ABI. With this, you can run the backwards-compatible
> ABI internally, but send our the new ABI for inclusion in the mainline
> kernel. Send out the patch between the two along with the other
> patches and make it clear that you still depend on this patch but that
> it is not meant to be included.
Ok, it's nice. I will build new glibc and busybox to test new ABI.

> 
> Nothing stops you from using the old ABI as long as you want to, since
> you can always put the patch on top of any upstream kernel when you
> make a system image. It is quite normal to have a few patches required
> to get a working kernel, although of course everyone tries to keep these
> to a minimum.
> 
> It is probably also a good time for you to start learning about managing
> patches for a submission. Everyone does this a bit differently, but
> there two basic tools that most people use:
> 
> * Quilt is a simple tool that manages plain files with patches that
>   apply on top of each other. You can easily modify patches in the middle,
>   keep a patch description for each one and reorder the patches. It
>   is mostly compatible with git-send-email for submitting the patches
>   to the mailing list. Typically, you will want to use the quilt series
>   in combination with a sourcecode management tool like git, in order to
>   keep a history of what you have done.
> 
> * Git can do everything that quilt does, besides doing many other things
>   as well. The most important sub-command to learn here is 'git rebase -i',
>   which lets you reorder changeset and insert or delete changesets in the
>   middle of a branch. It takes somewhat longer to be productive with git
>   rebase than with quilt, but I personally find it much more reliable.
> 
> stgit is a tool that tries to combine the features of quilt and git, but
> as far as I can tell, most users have moved on to just using git by itself.
> 
Thanks.

Guan Xuetao

--
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/