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]

Date:	Mon, 30 May 2011 14:14:15 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....EDU>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix corruption of CONFIG_X86_32 in 'make oldconfig'


* David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 30 May 2011, Theodore Tso wrote:
> 
> > OK, so to clarify, what you want is for ARCH=xxx to always override
> > whatever is in .config?  Are we all on the same page here?  I thought
> > David was arguing that what was in .config should always be more
> > important, since he regards "ARCH=xxxx" as "legacy".
> 
> I am saying that we should not have that redundancy at all. ATM we *only* 
> have it for CONFIG_64BIT and *only* on x86, not others like ppc/sh/sparc 
> etc.

Even if we were ready to remove a feature that is 'only' available on 
90%+ of development systems that kernel developers use today, we 
probably couldn't do it due to the upstream kernel regression policy 
anyway. Especially when there is no functionally equivalent 
replacement.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/