linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lib/decompress_unxz.c: removing all memory helper functions

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 31 May 2012 19:54:51 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Thavatchai Makphaibulcboke <thavatchai.makpahibulchoke@...com>
Cc:	Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
	"lethal@...ux-sh.org" <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"kaloz@...nwrt.org" <kaloz@...nwrt.org>,
	"matt.fleming@...el.com" <matt.fleming@...el.com>,
	"lasse.collin@...aani.org" <lasse.collin@...aani.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-s390@...r.kernel.org" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-sh@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux@....linux.org.uk" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"schwidefsky@...ibm.com" <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	"heiko.carstens@...ibm.com" <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	"linux390@...ibm.com" <linux390@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/decompress_unxz.c: removing all memory helper
 functions

On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 20:48 -0600, Thavatchai Makphaibulcboke wrote:
> On 05/28/2012 01:03 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> 
> > can we do not duplicate those functions?
> 
> Thanks J for the comment.  Unfortunately, there is no easy way to share
> files among different architectures' preboot environment.  We have the
> choices either to have each architecture define its own copies or the
> decompressor defines them.  I believe the former is preferable.  As
> Lasse also pointed out, this way any specific architecture could provide
> an architectural dependent optimized version, if it chooses to.

Maybe provide __weak default functions that
can be overridden by any arch that could
or wants to improve on the defaults.


--
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/