From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linutronix.de (146.0.238.70:993) by crypto-ml.lab.linutronix.de with IMAP4-SSL for ; 11 Jun 2018 15:19:03 -0000 Received: from mail-pg0-x230.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c05::230]) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1fSOb0-0006oU-E7 for speck@linutronix.de; Mon, 11 Jun 2018 17:19:02 +0200 Received: by mail-pg0-x230.google.com with SMTP id l2-v6so9892776pgc.7 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2018 08:19:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.linux-foundation.org (173-164-127-25-Oregon.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [173.164.127.25]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u63-v6sm86604259pgd.65.2018.06.11.08.18.54 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 11 Jun 2018 08:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Linus Torvalds Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 08:18:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds Subject: [MODERATED] Re: eager FPU backport for 2.6.32 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: speck@linutronix.de List-ID: On Mon, 11 Jun 2018, speck for Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > For the lucky souls who have to backport eager FPU support to 2.6.32, > and at the risk of being larted by Thomas :) here is my current list of > FPU patches on top of 2.6.32. I tried to include also those that were > already in RHEL before I started the backport. Please, why are we doing this crazy thing? Who really cares about 2.6.32? The likelihood that they have any security at all is basically NIL, so why care about it for some odd x86 hardware bug? Maybe 2.6.32 is used in the embedded world, but if you allow people to run random binaries on it, you're f*cking insane. Why not tell people that? Linus