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]

Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2023 16:03:56 +0000
From: Chris Rankin <rankincj@...il.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Does Linux still support UP?

Hi,

I have already attached as much information as I am *ever* likely to
be able to extract about this problem to the Bugzilla ticket.

Cheers,
Chris

On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 at 15:41, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:
>
> 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.