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: <CAK8P3a1MSsL1vhV7Y98wCnP6NzK+OhqYpkoNuRm2J5PkJEK8=g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 1 Jun 2018 17:20:12 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [net-next, wrong] make BPFILTER_UMH depend on X86

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 3:42 AM, Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
> 2018-05-31 0:17 GMT+09:00 Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>:
>> On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 05:31:01PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> Hmm.
> For cross-compiling, we set 'ARCH' via the environment variable or the
> command line.
>
> ARCH is not explicitly set, the top-level Makefile sets it to $(SUBARCH)
>
>
> ARCH ?= $(SUBARCH)
>
>
> Maybe, we can assume the native build if $(ARCH) and $(SUBARCH) are the same?
>

SUBARCH is also used with a special meaning for arch/um where we build
with ARCH=um SUBARCH=x86, either on native (x86) or cross builds.


So doing that would still work in most but not all cases.

What is the reason for using HOSTCC rather than CC anyway? I think
the correct way to do this would be to check if CC is able to link binaries
and disallow the option if it's not.

Don't we already do something like that for tools/testing/selftest which
also needs to generate binaries with CC?

       Arnd

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ