| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1402062330520.17635@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 23:33:23 +0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@...esourcery.com> To: Torvald Riegel <triegel@...hat.com> CC: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@....com>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>, "paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, "gcc@....gnu.org" <gcc@....gnu.org> Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] arch: atomic rework On Fri, 7 Feb 2014, Torvald Riegel wrote: > I think that if we have different options, there needs to be agreement > on which to choose across the compilers, at the very least. I don't > quite know how this looks like for GCC and LLVM, for example. I'm not sure we even necessarily get compatibility for the alignment of _Atomic types yet (and no ABI document I've seen discusses that issue). -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@...esourcery.com -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists