netdev - Re: Does Linux still support UP?

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: <ZY7omD5OBLUg6pyx@duo.ucw.cz>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2023 16:41:35 +0100
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Chris Rankin <rankincj@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Does Linux still support UP?

Hi!

> I have an ancient i586 UP machine that happily runs vanilla Linux
> 6.4.16, but which locks up shortly after booting vanilla 6.5.0. The
> kernel *seems* to run into trouble as soon as the networking layer
> becomes busy. However, its SysRq-S/U/B sequence still seems to work as
> expected and so obviously *something* is still responding somewhere.
> 
> This problem still exists in vanilla 6.6.8.
> 
> FWIW I have raised this bug in bugzilla:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218296

Yes, UP should still work. I'm using such machine and intend to
continue with that. But it seems more testing would be welcome.

And yes, you'll likely need to bisect.

Best regards,
								Pavel

-- 
People of Russia, stop Putin before his war on Ukraine escalates.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (196 bytes)