linux-kernel - Re: Choosing a HyperThreading/SMP/MultiCore kernel ?

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:	Sat, 13 Jan 2007 20:55:51 -0500
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
Cc:	Sunil Naidu <akula2.shark@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Choosing a HyperThreading/SMP/MultiCore kernel ?

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 15:18:31 EST, Bill Davidsen said:
> Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 10:03:49 EST, Lennart Sorensen said:
> >> I would expect any distribution should work on these (as long as the
> >> kernel they use isn't too old.).  Of course if it is a Mac, you need a
> >> distribution that supports their firmware (which is of course not a PC
> >> bios).  As long as you can boot it, any i386 or amd64 kernel with smp
> >> enabled should use all the processors present (well amd64 on the
> >> core2duo and on the p4 if it is em64t enabled).
> > 
> > amd64 will only work on a core2duo if it's a T7200 or higher - the
> > lower numbers are 32-bit-only chipsets.  I admit not knowing what
> > exact variant the Mac has.
> 
> I don't believe that's correct, the Intel features page indicates all 
> core2 have both 64bit and virtualization. Perhaps some of the core (no 
> 2) models didn't? Even the old 930 had those features by my notes.

My screwup - the chart I looked at managed to get the Core and Core2 series
mixed up. Here's a hopefully more canonical one:

http://www.intel.com/products/processor_number/proc_info_table.pdf

Does however list some Core2 that don't do virtualization (page 3, the
T5600 and T5500), which is what I think confused the author of the table
that I misread. ;)

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped