| 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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2012 22:15:53 -0400 From: Xin Tong <xerox.time.tech@...il.com> To: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Xin Tong <xerox.time.tech@...il.com>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: oostore on x86 Is there a way to relax the amd64 memory model. does the latest intel processor micro-architecture support it ? Xin On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 02:49:56PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > On 04/07/2012 12:48 PM, Xin Tong wrote: > > > how can one enable oostore on x86, does one need to recompile the kernel ? > > > > Yes, and expect the code to have seriously bitrotted. > > It also only ever worked on the early IDT Winchip processors. > They weren't particularly great when they came out in the late 90s, > and I doubt they've improved with age. > > I'd estimate the number of people running anything newer than a > 2.4 kernel on those chips to be approximating zero, largely because > those old systems rarely had a lot of memory, and modern 2.6 capable > distros probably run like a dog on them. > > I've suggested just removing that code in the past a few times. > Even if it does still work, anyone complaining about performance loss > of a modern kernel on something of that era can't be taken seriously. > > Dave > -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists