linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: suggest running a 64bit kernel on LM capable machines with plenty memory.

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: <20090311123845.GF11935@one.firstfloor.org>
Date:	Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:38:45 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Ozan Çağlayan <ozan@...dus.org.tr>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: suggest running a 64bit kernel on LM capable machines with plenty memory.

> Esp on x86_64 machines with >=4G of memory its insane to run i386-PAE.

Not sure I would apply insane to 4GB, but it definitely applies 
to >= 16GB, likely >= 8GB. Enough known deadlocks in this case.
I would consider >=16GB on 32bit at least a kerneloops worthy condition.

Perhaps the warnings should vary in urgency.  e.g. if it's >= 16GB and 
not 2:2 split we know that the system will have problems and it should
strongly suggest, otherwise weakly.

Or perhaps it should be measured in percentage of mem_map
in lowmem?

-Andi

-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/