linux-kernel - Re: Can we drop upstream Linux x32 support?

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:   Mon, 10 Dec 2018 17:40:33 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc:     "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, bp@...en8.de,
        fweimer@...hat.com, vapier@...too.org, hjl.tools@...il.com,
        dalias@...c.org, x32@...ldd.debian.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Subject: Re: Can we drop upstream Linux x32 support?

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 5:23 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> I'm seriously considering sending a patch to remove x32 support from
> upstream Linux.  Here are some problems with it:

I talked to Arnd (I think - we were talking about all the crazy ABI's,
but maybe it was with somebody else) about exactly this in Edinburgh.

Apparently the main real use case is for extreme benchmarking. It's
the only use-case where the complexity of maintaining a whole
development environment and distro is worth it, it seems. Apparently a
number of Spec submissions have been done with the x32 model.

I'm not opposed to trying to sunset the support, but let's see who complains..

              Linus