linux-kernel - Re: Various x86 syscall mechanisms

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.1.10.0807011402450.12878@fbirervta.pbzchgretzou.qr>
Date:	Tue, 1 Jul 2008 14:06:32 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
cc:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Various x86 syscall mechanisms


On Saturday 2008-06-21 02:27, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> There is no reason we couldn't do syscall for 32-bit native, but the only
> processor that would benefit would be K7, and that's far enough in the past
> that I don't think anyone cares enough.

Well if it gives a speed improvement, I'd certainly care.
I do not see a reason why I should throw away the K7 if it still works,
even after 5 years lifetime.
--
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/