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  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]
Date:   Sun, 19 Feb 2017 07:55:05 -0800
From:   Guenter Roeck <>
To:     Fengguang Wu <>,
        Stafford Horne <>
Cc:     Openrisc <>,,
        Tony Breeds <>,
        Segher Boessenkool <>
Subject: Re: Crosstool/kbuild-all toolchain updates

On 02/19/2017 05:26 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Hi Stafford,
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 07:44:38AM +0900, Stafford Horne wrote:
>> Hi Fengguang/All,
>> I am working as the OpenRISC linux kernel maintainer.  Currently in
>> linux-next our patches are causing kbuild test robot to fail.
>> This is because the patches are taking advantage of 2 'new' (2 year old)
>> instrucions (l.swa/l.lwa) and the build robots, as far as I can tell,
>> use the 'make.cross' [0] build script from lkp-tests.git.  These point
>> to the crosstools [1] toolchains maintained by Tony.
>> I sent a mail to Tony who maintains the crosstools but I didn't get a
>> reply and it seems he is not longer working on them [1].
>> I think our options are:
>>  1. Update 'make.cross' to point somewhere else for openrisc
>>  2. Update and maintain crosstools
>> For 1. its trvial but, maybe not the best solution.
> It's a valuable patch, thank you!
>> For 2. I created new crosstool builds for openrisc [3]. The way the
>> crosstools are maintained is via a patches.tar file and it seem a custom
>> buildall script.  I dont see the source for that custom script anywhere.
>> I am thinking I could help to update and 'opensource' the crosstool
>> build scripts to make it easier for everyone to update toolchains by
>> sending patches.
>> But, I would need access to crosstool on and an OK from
>> everyone.
>> Any opinions? Questions?
> An uptodate crosstool and reasonable active maintainer would be very
> welcome. I'll sure be a heavy user. In the past year when crosstool is
> not updated to gcc-6, we've resorted to using debian packages for some
> ARCHs and building our own cross compliers for the other ARCHs. The
> latter are based on Segher's buildall tools (CCed). The private builds
> may work for us in short term, however is obvious not a satisfactory
> solution.



Powered by blists - more mailing lists