linux-kernel - AW: More E820 brokenness

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 27 Sep 2007 23:19:39 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Joerg Pommnitz <pommnitz@...oo.com>
To:	Jordan Crouse <jordan.crouse@....com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	jkeating@...hat.com, Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Subject: AW: More E820 brokenness

Hello all,
I won't be able to test anything before next Tuesday, but I'm with
Jordan on this one. Have a look at the dmsg output I sent you some
time ago (http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/584681).

This was as plain from Linus' tree as you get it (git bisect, make defconfig, make)
and I see:
BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
 BIOS-e820: 0000000000000000 - 000000000009fc00 (usable)
 BIOS-e820: 000000000009fc00 - 00000000000a0000 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 00000000000e0000 - 0000000000100000 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 0000000000100000 - 000000001e7b0000 (usable)
 BIOS-e820: 000000001e7b0000 - 000000001e7bffc0 (ACPI data)
 BIOS-e820: 000000001e7bffc0 - 000000001e7c0000 (ACPI NVS)
 BIOS-e820: 0000000040400000 - 0000000040440004 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 00000000f0000000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved) --  
Kind regards
 
       Joerg
 


----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----
Von: Jordan Crouse <jordan.crouse@....com>
An: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>
CC: jkeating@...hat.com; Joerg Pommnitz <pommnitz@...oo.com>; Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>; Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Gesendet: Freitag, den 28. September 2007, 01:15:52 Uhr
Betreff: Re: More E820 brokenness

On 27/09/07 15:47 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Jordan Crouse wrote:
> > 
> > Breaks on the Geode - original behavior.
> > 
> > I think that having boot_prams.e820_entries != 0 makes the kernel
> > assume the e820 data is correct.
> > 
> 
> Okay, now I'm utterly baffled how 2.6.22 ever worked on this Geode,
> because this, to the best of my reading, mimics the 2.6.22 behavior
> exactly.  DID IT REALLY, and/or did you make any kind of configuration
> changes?

I copied in a 2.6.22 kernel to see that it really did work, and it did.
But here's the crazy part - I did a dmesg, and it looks like it
*is* using e820 data, and it looks complete (I see the entire map - 
including the ACPI and reserved blocks way up high).

So apparently it was the 2.6.22 code that was buggy, but reading it,
I don't immediately see how. 

Jordan
-- 
Jordan Crouse
Systems Software Development Engineer 
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.








      __________________________________  
Yahoo! Clever: Sie haben Fragen? Yahoo! Nutzer antworten Ihnen. www.yahoo.de/clever

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/