linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] KVM: Kernel-based Virtual Machine

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]

Date:	Sun, 22 Oct 2006 20:41:05 +0200
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Anthony Liguori <aliguori@...ibm.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] KVM: Kernel-based Virtual Machine

Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Sunday 22 October 2006 20:00, Avi Kivity wrote:
>   
>> Existing installations?
>>
>> Dropping 32-bit host support would certainly kill a lot of #ifdefs and
>> reduce the amount of testing needed.  It would also force me to upgrade
>> my home machine.
>>     
>
> Ok, but if you radically change the kernel<->user API, doesn't that mean
> you have to upgrade in the same way? 

No, why? I'd just upgrade the userspace.  Am I misunderstanding you?

> The 32 bit emulation mode in x86_64
> is actually pretty complete, so it probably boils down to a kernel upgrade
> for you, without having to touch any of the user space.
>   

For me personally, I don't mind.  I don't know about others.

-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/