linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix corruption of CONFIG_X86

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: <1306753958.2029.450.camel@i7.infradead.org>
Date:	Mon, 30 May 2011 12:12:37 +0100
From:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix corruption of CONFIG_X86_32 in 'make oldconfig'

On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 13:04 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> That v2 changelog still seems to have an attitude though about the 
> ARCH=i386 and ARCH=x86_64 modifiers (thoroughly debunked both by 
> myself and others), so mind sending a v3 one which correctly and 
> fairly describes the situation? (or ack my variant which ought to be 
> pretty close) 

SIGWENCH; have to run. Back later. Can we make it something like

"This version preserves the legacy ARCH=i386/ARCH=x86_64 behaviour for
randconfig/oldconfig/all*config, although I believe that this *ought* to
be removed in the future, in favour of a generic method of overriding
config options — one that doesn't work *only* for one particular config
setting (CONFIG_64BIT), and *only* on one architecture (there's no
equivalent for mips/powerpc/s390/parisc/sparc to flip CONFIG_64BIT for
you)."

It's less of an 'attitude' but I think it clearly states the situation?

-- 
dwmw2

--
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/