linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v2 0/15] x86: Remove support for TSC-less and CX8-less CPUs

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: <aCX9iN5BxitdozwC@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 16:43:20 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Ahmed S . Darwish" <darwi@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 0/15] x86: Remove support for TSC-less and CX8-less
 CPUs


* Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:

> On 5/15/25 01:56, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >  80 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 14117 deletions(-)
> 
> Thanks for doing this, Ingo. A lot of this code was sitting off on 
> the side and not causing _too_ many problems. But that was (I think) 
> mostly because it was being so lightly used.
> 
> I've been using Linux since the late 90's. The oldest systems I ever 
> ran it on were i586's and they were old at the time.
> 
> I suspect this is going to throw a couple more compile issues at us 
> to fix, that's par for the course on something like this. Ideally, 
> we'd wait for v6.16-rc1 for applying something of this magnitude. 
> What were your plans on when to apply it?

Yeah, so the good news is that the bots have been build-testing this 
series for a few weeks, and besides an UML build issue that I fixed 
there were very few problems. (knock on wood)

And since Linus asked for this and semi-acked it, I might try sending 
this in this merge window, if it's quiet enough from the x86 tree 
perspective. The diffstat is large, but as you too alluded to, it's 
99.9% obsolete code that got very little testing in practice, so I 
don't think there's an elevated risk of regressions. But let's see how 
the v6.16 merge window goes?

> In any case:
> 
> Acked-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>

Thanks!

	Ingo