Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp1579863wrg; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:48:46 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x227qGDu/iZUb4jNHjmXCkcEyjdVqUw2/0BTwSlEzOv1ijeTakPhfO5P81zzjIBtlp3bAKzhA X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9005:: with SMTP id a5-v6mr9070302plp.251.1518392925965; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:48:45 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1518392925; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=m4P7Q3ryrnLhuEt3FKKrHFmnWHu0GwKHgS2ip5uholhrQjL1usdEIqm1HwCO8HPuYg xvy5aPChkIIODyzowZjHeELFCjYMsNel8KarnYD+DPc0rlLEysNtcqNd1t5+dQC4A3Y9 FRajLnKNrfHVzS9Y6epKsBmzPEsch5TY5Ef6qyGkYYEgE0rWo9kHTiQYR0A4gJIygKgQ 2KE//8dTeT2qU4X1TTH1rnxjb/itB0mWGNJ75qk1p4C7MxRixWX/fzrTK/r1PvI/K/ce GBMyXigOUXo5brcjQAl+cmf3Zv7wqLUu9r2TOdSX8UpAOlkC6gCckVXYCQbvPXmgR6fq csXQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id :dkim-signature:arc-authentication-results; bh=2mttT2XvBij6B+0wlRO1/dAD7X6o/Gs9myjhCwiXCj0=; b=0ovpTDCzOQhyxECs4SuyPH9gb3Ky4OSGs0tzvG2T/VVg1R3PG2zWD9LQk2jVXfmuAh egOM5UXVqlVi827J2bvvwErb8EWr0zAcl+3MBphIKQfJmCRczfaDAd1UR4/gON5gCSxJ Nw+yK+/fJJZEYDSIj4BZNQCc3mg8DmGGIEFKYp75Jrn8oPoouylgryWCMFaMSPxTPHe9 5gIOK7oS4kEFVBHafTn89nFLWyvGZCOgXOp3Y460n0xdnTOVqIKbhlUEv/QdNm0oNbGO pkn7aXasUJe2KL6r4gL1akZfOfvz5KKjDDyR412F4LNEl2l9X9M1/G2SpWhhEQvNvEr3 hhCA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@hansenpartnership.com header.s=20151216 header.b=jdLGyCEw; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=hansenpartnership.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id b96-v6si3885174pli.325.2018.02.11.15.48.31; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:48:45 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@hansenpartnership.com header.s=20151216 header.b=jdLGyCEw; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=hansenpartnership.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932267AbeBKXrW (ORCPT + 99 others); Sun, 11 Feb 2018 18:47:22 -0500 Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:46204 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932221AbeBKXrV (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Feb 2018 18:47:21 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 324E58EE14D; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:47:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rDrJ5P2uU1Uw; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:47:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from [153.66.254.194] (unknown [50.35.65.221]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C3E738EE0FC; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:47:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=hansenpartnership.com; s=20151216; t=1518392839; bh=GpOi/9wHQ2LULZFDmnfaB5sLcc6qg70kVEq8w31YT2c=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=jdLGyCEwYz5gNI18K/70pjGUxNLNW8IMadiUlBeTtVDFP7a5LlZLcAAxnMBWnwmIJ Wv4dGbzuJJZp2Hc7UrEvv0gqcTwJZBPXR9jzKQ6El1yOJocXmPZeK1XNoCL50iKl0g x5GGY62IrQzd4DESK4LsOa7UboGButU8ErO1GDbY= Message-ID: <1518392837.3979.14.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/31 v2] PTI support for x86_32 From: James Bottomley To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Mark D Rustad , Adam Borowski , Linus Torvalds , Joerg Roedel , Andy Lutomirski , Joerg Roedel , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H . Peter Anvin" , X86 ML , LKML , Linux-MM , Dave Hansen , Josh Poimboeuf , Juergen Gross , Peter Zijlstra , Borislav Petkov , Jiri Kosina , Boris Ostrovsky , Brian Gerst , David Laight , Denys Vlasenko , Eduardo Valentin , Greg KH , Will Deacon , "Liguori, Anthony" , Daniel Gruss , Hugh Dickins , Kees Cook , Andrea Arcangeli , Waiman Long , Pavel Machek Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:47:17 -0800 In-Reply-To: References: <1518168340-9392-1-git-send-email-joro@8bytes.org> <20180209191112.55zyjf4njum75brd@suse.de> <20180210091543.ynypx4y3koz44g7y@angband.pl> <20180211105909.53bv5q363u7jgrsc@angband.pl> <6FB16384-7597-474E-91A1-1AF09201CEAC@gmail.com> <0C6EFF56-F135-480C-867C-B117F114A99F@amacapital.net> <1518387160.3979.10.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2018-02-11 at 14:30 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > > > > On Feb 11, 2018, at 2:12 PM, James Bottomley > nPartnership.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sun, 2018-02-11 at 11:42 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 11, 2018, at 9:40 AM, Mark D Rustad > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 11, 2018, at 2:59 AM, Adam Borowski > > > > pl> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does Debian make it easy to upgrade to a 64-bit kernel if > > > > > > you > > > > > > have a > > > > > > 32-bit install? > > > > > > > > > > Quite easy, yeah.  Crossgrading userspace is not for the > > > > > faint of the heart, but changing just the kernel is fine. > > > > > > > > ISTR that iscsi doesn't work when running a 64-bit kernel with > > > > a 32-bit userspace. I remember someone offered kernel patches > > > > to fix it, but I think they were rejected. I haven't messed > > > > with that stuff in many years, so perhaps the userspace side > > > > now has accommodation for it. It might be something to check > > > > on. > > > > > > > > > > At the risk of suggesting heresy, should we consider removing > > > x86_32 support at some point? > > > > Hey, my cloud server is 32 bit: > > > > bedivere:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo  > > processor    : 0 > > vendor_id    : GenuineIntel > > cpu family    : 15 > > model        : 2 > > model name    : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz > > stepping    : 9 > > microcode    : 0x2e > > cpu MHz        : 2813.464 > > [...] > > > > I suspect a lot of people are in the same position: grandfathered > > in on an old hosting plan, but not really willing to switch to a > > new 64 bit box because the monthly cost about doubles and nothing > > it does is currently anywhere up to (let alone over) the capacity > > of the single 686 processor. > > > > The thing which is making me consider it is actually getting a TPM > > to protect the private keys, but doubling the monthly cost is still > > a huge disincentive. > > Where are they hosting this?  Last I checked, replacing a P4 and > motherboard with something new paid for itself in about a year in > power savings. It's a rented server not a co-lo cage.  I don't doubt it's costing the hosting provider, but they're keeping my rates low. James