Hi Alastair,
Thanks for relaying OpenMPI's upstream
maintainer's interest in our opinions on
maintaining 32 bit support.
My humble comments are
1.) 32 bit hardware can be more secure because
it's so old it predates back doors known as
Intel's Management Engine[1] and
AMD's Platform Secure Processor[2]
2.) and I'm OK with reporting bugs.
Thanks again,
Kingsley
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine#Security_vulnerabilities
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Platform_Security_Processor#Reported_vulnerabilities
On 02/07/2023 09:54, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
Hi
I've been pinged by the upstream maintainer of OpenMPI Jefff Squyres as
to our opinions on maintaining 32-bit support.
See a thread here: https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/11282
Until now I've asked for OMPI to hold off going to 64-bit only; saying we
can help with the maintenance burden with our testing infrastructure.
But we're not well suited to run multi-node test jobs.
If 32-bit support is dropped in OMPI we can switch to MPICH as the default
on those archs instead, but the core problem remains: how much can we
support and test on 32-bit?
(Note: We're at OpenMPI 4.1.4 now for Bookworm; no change planned)
Comments please,
Alastair McKinstry
--
Alastair McKinstry,
GPG: 82383CE9165B347C787081A2CBE6BB4E5D9AD3A5
e: mckinstry@debian.org, im: @sceal.ie:mckinstry