linux-kernel - Re: Is 386 processor still supported?

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:	Thu, 08 Jan 2009 15:27:13 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Cc:	Adam Osuchowski <adwol@...k.pl>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Is 386 processor still supported?

On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 15:21 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > > Subject: x86: make spinlocks available on machines without xadd insn
> > > Current kernel wouldn't compile on ancient x86 machines that don't support 
> > > xadd instruction, as ticket spinlocks implementation unconditionally uses 
> > > it.
> > > On machines without CONFIG_X86_XADD, use old-style byte spinlock 
> > > implementation instead.
> > afaik we don't support i386-smp and up spinlocks are trivial
> > preempt_disable() calls.
> 
> Hmm. Where in Kconfig is SMP for M386 not allowed?

Dunno, kconfig is too much of a jungle for a simple person like me ;-)

But afaik i386 (and possibly i486) don't support nearly enough for a
modern SMP system.

Alan used to have i486-smp I think, one of the very few ever made.

--
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/