linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] tools/nolibc: add a new "install_all

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: <cdf2ebbf-8bfe-40f8-a071-10d56221c202@t-8ch.de>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 09:27:10 +0200
From: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, 
	Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] tools/nolibc: add a new "install_all_archs"
 target

On 2025-06-27 07:49:18+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 07:46:18AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 07:11:45AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > On 2025-06-26 23:15:07+0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > (...)
> > > With the symlink, a given generic UAPI tree can be specialized to one
> > > specific architecture. But here we want to create a full sysroot that works
> > > for all architectures *at the same time*. So a symlink would not be enough.
> > 
> > Exactly!
> > 
> > > > If it's indeed possible to concatenate the path name (I couldn't
> > > > figure that out either), that could also be done in place of the
> > > > symlink but simpler than the #if/#elif/#elif/... block, like
> > > > 
> > > > #include <arch.h> // defines ARCH_PREFIX
> > > > #include CONCAT(ARCH_PREFIX, ioctl.h)
> > > 
> > > If we can't get it to work like this I would still prefer to have a
> > > template header file which gets specialized with sed instead of the
> > > Makefile loop.
> > 
> > The thing is that it's not a single header, it's for each header file
> > present in asm/. And we can't request that anyone adding anything into
> > asm would also have to maintain one extra template for each of them.
> > 
> > Or I'm simply not getting how you would envision it maybe.
> 
> Or do you mean a template that contains all #ifdef/#include for all
> archs, that serves as the basis to rebuild all headers, and that we
> still have the loop on all files in the makefile ? I.e. you simply
> want to drop the arch loop ? If that's it, yes I'm fine with this as
> well and can give it a try.

This is exactly what I meant.


Thomas