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]

Message-ID: <20090115142541.5a7711b1@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:25:41 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
Cc:	Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw@...-owl.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, Adam Osuchowski <adwol@...k.pl>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: Is 386 processor still supported?

> userland support with little burden for both Linux and respective user 
> software maintainers.  Certainly it adds some bloat to the kernel, but I 
> think it is not an option that should be outright dismissed without 
> consideration.

Nobody normally builds for 386 (and you need the big FPU emulator etc too
and pay a big penalty for the lack of working WP bits) so it wouldn't be
a big penalty if you can actually find an i386 user any more ;)

--
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/