linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: fix panic when handling "mem={invalid}" param

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:	Fri, 04 Feb 2011 12:20:24 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
CC:	Kamal Mostafa <kamal@...onical.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: fix panic when handling "mem={invalid}" param

On 02/04/2011 12:19 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>
>> All he looks at is when the value returned is zero.  It wouldn't be zero
>> for any actual value, including mem=32M.
>>
> 
> when user pass wrong parameter like less 128M, kernel will not boot either.
> Do we need to sanity check for that?
> 

We could check for the value being smaller than the relocated value of
_end.  That is probably the smallest *fixed* value we can assign.

	-hpa

--
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/