linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] kbuild: generate intermediate C files instead of copying

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: <CA+55aFz60vWjme=wE5LoGy2_RoHiWhzMW8KYWH-qYub2mRGssg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 19 Aug 2017 11:12:30 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc:     Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marit.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com>,
        "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@...e.fr>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] kbuild: generate intermediate C files instead of
 copying _shipped files

On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> Anybody want to look at just getting rid of the gperf use?

I took a stab at it. It wasn't too bad, although I think this needs a
*lot* of testing, and I think it needs checking of Makefile
dependencies etc.

NOTE NOTE NOTE! This may be *COMPLETELY* broken. It just happens to
build for me.  So when I say "it wasn't too bad", I really mean "it
wasn't too bad, but I didn't spend a lot of effort on it either".

Honestly, the code is better and more legible without gperf, imho. And
it removes more lines than it adds - and even if you ignore changes to
the shipped lines, it's only an additional 15 lines of code,

It's likely not even any slower, but who the hell knows.. Do we even
care? It's almost certainly faster if you compare to generating that
gperf code.

              Linus

View attachment "0001-Remove-gperf-usage-from-toolchain.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (39163 bytes)