linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: ep93xx: remove MaverickCrunch support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CACRpkdbRbgjo1AkZVd0J1nhuo601o8=20rKR+ccaJR1+vqn6qg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 3 Aug 2021 14:12:33 +0200
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Martin Guy <martinwguy@...il.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@...ionengravers.com>,
        Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@...il.com>,
        SoC Team <soc@...nel.org>,
        Nikita Shubin <nikita.shubin@...uefel.me>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Hubert Feurstein <hubert.feurstein@...tec.at>,
        Lukasz Majewski <lukma@...x.de>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: ep93xx: remove MaverickCrunch support

On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 5:45 PM Martin Guy <martinwguy@...il.com> wrote:

> > was removed from gcc in its 4.8 release in 2012.
>
> I was sad about that, as I had managed to get it working correctly in
> 4.2 4.3 and 4.4.
> Unfortunately the GCC ARM maintainer at the time was paid by ARM, and
> they had no interest in it, as I gather the ARM-Cirrus partnership
> ended up disappointingly.

Political issues aside, have you considered contributing support
to LLVM instead?

It currently doesn't even support ARMv4 AFAIK but reportedly
has an easier to use and maintain back-end. (I do not know if
this is true, I just browsed this:
https://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMBackend.html )
Current ARM Targets are here:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/main/llvm/lib/Target/ARM
And they have a very clear and straight-forward developer policy:
https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html

If ARMv4 support could be added to LLVM, that would solve
a lot of my headaches for ARM32, where we have things like
SA110 being actively maintained.

Yours,
Linus Walleij