linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arch: um: rust: Add i386 support for Rust

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: <b46fd359f62fc7c50790fb19a8814c89a10a7c1c.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 20:02:17 +0200
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Cc: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, Brendan Higgins
 <brendan.higgins@...ux.dev>,  Rae Moar <rmoar@...gle.com>, Thomas Gleixner
 <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,  Miguel Ojeda
 <ojeda@...nel.org>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Masahiro Yamada
 <masahiroy@...nel.org>,  Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, Anton Ivanov
 <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,  kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,  linux-um@...ts.infradead.org,
 rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,  Wedson Almeida Filho
 <wedsonaf@...il.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen
 <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, Boqun
 Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, 
 Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, Benno Lossin
 <benno.lossin@...ton.me>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>, Alice
 Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, 
 linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch: um: rust: Add i386 support for Rust

On Wed, 2024-06-05 at 19:59 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> 
> > > -ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> > > +ifneq ($(or $(CONFIG_X86_64),$(CONFIG_X86_32)),)
> > 
> > These configurations are mutually exclusive, so would it look more
> > readable to have it be:
> > 
> > 
> > ifeq ($(CONFIG_X86_32)$(CONFIG_X86_64),y)
> > 
> 
> Or simply
> 
> ifdef CONFIG_X86

No, we're talking about ARCH=um, so CONFIG_X86 isn't set, but
CONFIG_X86_{32,64} are set as the "sub" or "host" arch. :)

johannes