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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2015 10:54:19 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: Xunlei Pang <xlpang@....com> cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Koichi Yasutake <yasutake.koichi@...panasonic.com>, linux-am33-list@...hat.com, Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@...aro.org>, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] time: Add the common weak version of update_persistent_clock() On Sun, 26 Jul 2015, Xunlei Pang wrote: > From: Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@...aro.org> > > The weak update_persistent_clock64() calls update_persistent_clock(), > if the architecture defines a update_persistent_clock64() to replace > and remove its update_persistent_clock() version, the compiler will s/compiler/linker/ right? > throw an undefined symbol error, that is, any arch that switches to > update_persistent_clock64() will have this issue. > > So, we should add the common weak update_persistent_clock(). Are we adding it or should we add it? Thanks, tglx -- 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