On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 2:01 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm not entirly sure what to do here. On the one hand, it's 32bit, so > who gives a crap, otoh we shouldn't break these ancient chips either I > suppose. This is something that I've repeatedly had to bring up, whenever something breaks because someone meant well by enabling more security bells and whistles: x86-32 is by definition legacy hardware. Enabling more bells and whistles essentially kills support for all but the very latest variants of the x86-32 family. This is the wrong approach. The right approach is to accept that building for x86-32 inherently means building for older and thus less secure architectures. Martin-Éric
