linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/36] AArch64 Linux kernel port

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: <20120709164956.4baaf7a4@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 9 Jul 2012 16:49:56 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/36] AArch64 Linux kernel port

> I think the main strategy should be to spot duplicate code early
> and make sure we deal with it individually. Examples for this are
> probably the implementations for kvm and perf, which largely deal
> with the same hardware on both architectures. Those definitely must
> not get duplicated into mostly-identical files. In many cases, we're
> moving those things into drivers/*, in other cases we might want to
> use Makefile logic to include a sub-directory from one arch into another,
> as we do for arch/um.

If you want to put a subdir of one arch into another wouldn't it be
rather cleaner to use arm/arm/aarch64/ as your architecture base ?

Alan
--
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/