[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141116185622.GV22465@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:56:22 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
musl@...ts.openwall.com, Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: ARM atomics overhaul for musl
On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 10:27:04AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Would it make sense for arm and arm64 to add bits for these features
> to AT_HWCAP, along with an extra bit indicating that the kernel
> provides these bits?
Sadly since it wasn't available there from the beginning, I don't
think there would be a lot of benefit in adding it now, but it
wouldn't hurt.
It might be useful if there's a risk that the existing methods will
break in the future; adding it now would ensure that there are only a
known finite set of kernels for which the old hackish string methods
need to be used, so that there's no concern about their compatibility
with future kernels/models.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
