linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v7 1/3] x86 boot: setup data

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

Date:	Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:26:51 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC:	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v7 1/3] x86 boot: setup data

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Furthermore, on looking through the code again, I see a bunch of
> "init_pg_tables_end + setup_data_len" which really is ugly.

Yeah, that's what I'm objecting to.

>> What are the alignment rules for this structure?  Is it always 64-bit
>> aligned?  What about the relationship of len and data?
>>
>
> It's x86, so alignment is soft - it presumably *should* be 64-bit
> aligned, but nothing break if the boot loader doesn't.

This was more or less a rhetorical question - the code spends some
effort in rounding len up to some alignment, so its probably worth
documenting with the structure.


    J
-
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/