Le 02/09/2024 à 03:20, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit :
> On Sun, Sep 01, 2024 at 08:43:10PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
How would this fit in the logic where IIUC you just remove '_64' from
'x86_64' to get 'x86'
>>>
>>> Huh? That's not what tools/scripts/Makefile.arch does.
>>
>> Hum ..
Hi Jason,
Le 28/08/2024 à 15:55, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit :
> Linking to libsodium makes building this test annoying in cross
> compilation environments and is just way too much. Since this is just a
> basic correctness test, simply open code a simple, unoptimized, dumb
> chacha, rather than lin
Le 27/08/2024 à 15:58, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit :
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 09:20:16PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
>> Building test_vdso_getrandom currently leads to following issue:
>>
>> In file included from
>> /home/xry111/git-repos/linux/tools/include/linux/compiler_types.h:36,
>>
Le 26/08/2024 à 11:43, Thomas Gleixner a écrit :
> On Mon, Aug 26 2024 at 10:01, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Le 26/08/2024 à 09:50, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit :
>>> But tglx pointed out in that thread that this actually isn't necessary:
>>>
>>> | All of this is pointless because if a 32-bit applic
Le 26/08/2024 à 09:37, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit :
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 09:13:24AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> On powerpc, a call to a VDSO function is not a standard C function
>> call. Unlike x86 that returns a negated error code in case of an
>> error, powerpc sets CR[SO] and retur
Le 26/08/2024 à 09:28, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit :
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 09:13:22AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Don't hard-code x86 specific names, use vdso_config definitions
>> to find the correct function matching the architecture.
>>
>> Add random VDSO function names in names[][].