linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [5/7] Remove CONFIG_X86

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]

Message-ID: <20080118220628.GA17542@elte.hu>
Date:	Fri, 18 Jan 2008 23:06:28 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	hpa@...or.com, tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [5/7] Remove CONFIG_X86_TSC for 32bit II


* Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:

> Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> writes:
> 
> > The config option protects so little code that it is fairly pointless.
> > Also a lot of its code was related to itself only (as in panicing without
> > TSC). And TSC less CPUs are completely handled at runtime anyways.
> >
> > This makes 32bit behaviour match x86-64.
> >
> > I also removed an #if defined(CONFIG_X86_GENERIC) in get_cycles. Not 
> > sure what that was good for, it didn't make any sense.
> 
> Hmm, during further testing i found that the patch causes boot 
> failures in some configuration. I withdraw this one for now.

ok, pulled. In what situations did it fail? It worked fine on a (small) 
number of systems here.

> The other patches in the series are independent and should be still 
> considered for merging.

yep, they are in and have caused no problems so far.

	Ingo
--
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/