Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:56:22 -0500
From: Rich Felker <>
To: Andy Lutomirski <>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <>,, Szabolcs Nagy <>,
	Kees Cook <>,
	"" <>
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.


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.