On Wed 2013-02-06 16:28:08, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 02/01/2013 02:25 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Ouch, and... IIRC (hpa should know for sure), PAE is neccessary for
> > R^X support on x86, thus getting more common, not less. If it does not
> > work, that's bad news.
>
> Dare I ask what "R^X" is?
On Wed 2013-02-06 16:28:08, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 02/01/2013 02:25 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
Ouch, and... IIRC (hpa should know for sure), PAE is neccessary for
R^X support on x86, thus getting more common, not less. If it does not
work, that's bad news.
Dare I ask what R^X is?
Read xor
On 02/01/2013 02:25 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Ouch, and... IIRC (hpa should know for sure), PAE is neccessary for
> R^X support on x86, thus getting more common, not less. If it does not
> work, that's bad news.
Dare I ask what "R^X" is?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On 02/01/2013 02:25 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
Ouch, and... IIRC (hpa should know for sure), PAE is neccessary for
R^X support on x86, thus getting more common, not less. If it does not
work, that's bad news.
Dare I ask what R^X is?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 08:57 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
[...]
> OK, so by the time this thread gets to me there is of course no
> information in it.
Here's the history: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/93278
> The vast majority of all 32-bit kernels compiled these days are PAE, so
On 02/01/2013 02:25 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Fri 2013-02-01 11:20:44, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Thu 2013-01-31 23:38:27, Phil Turmel wrote:
On 01/31/2013 10:13 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
[trim /] Does not that prove that PAE is broken?
Please, Paul, take *yes* for an answer. It is
On Fri 2013-02-01 11:20:44, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Thu 2013-01-31 23:38:27, Phil Turmel wrote:
> > On 01/31/2013 10:13 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
> > > [trim /] Does not that prove that PAE is broken?
> >
> > Please, Paul, take *yes* for an answer. It is broken. You've received
> >
On Fri 2013-02-01 11:20:44, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Thu 2013-01-31 23:38:27, Phil Turmel wrote:
On 01/31/2013 10:13 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
[trim /] Does not that prove that PAE is broken?
Please, Paul, take *yes* for an answer. It is broken. You've received
multiple
On 02/01/2013 02:25 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Fri 2013-02-01 11:20:44, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Thu 2013-01-31 23:38:27, Phil Turmel wrote:
On 01/31/2013 10:13 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
[trim /] Does not that prove that PAE is broken?
Please, Paul, take *yes* for an answer. It is
On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 08:57 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
[...]
OK, so by the time this thread gets to me there is of course no
information in it.
Here's the history: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/93278
The vast majority of all 32-bit kernels compiled these days are PAE, so
10 matches
Mail list logo