linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the luto-misc tree

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: <20160715073119.GR30927@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:31:19 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the luto-misc tree

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:22:43AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 05:06:54PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > interacting with commit
> > 
> >   2a00f026a15d ("tools: Fix up BITS_PER_LONG setting")
> > 
> > from the tip tree.
> 
> Yuck.. that thing is horrid :/
> 
> What's wrong with so?
> 
> And if you really want to retain CONFIG_64BIT (because other headers
> might want it, and they currently do not) then do something like:
> 
> #ifdef __LP64__
> #define CONFIG_64BIT
> #else
> #define CONFIG_32BIT
> #endif
> 
> All GCC versions I checked have __CHAR_BIT__ and __SIZEOF_LONG__.
> 
> (and I checked most everything from 4.4 - 6.1)

clang-3.8 also defines all three of those, and I don't consider that a
usable compiler as it doesn't even build a kernel.