linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] ELF Relocatable x86 and x86

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, 01 Aug 2006 20:02:05 -0600
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	vgoyal@...ibm.com, fastboot@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Horms <horms@...ge.net.au>,
	Jan Kratochvil <lace@...kratochvil.net>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	Linda Wang <lwang@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] ELF Relocatable x86 and x86_64 bzImages

"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> writes:

> Vivek Goyal wrote:
>> Hi Eric,
>> Can't we use the x86_64 relocation approach for i386 as well? I mean keep
>> the virtual address space fixed and updating the page tables. This would
>> help in the sense that you don't have to change gdb if somebody decides to
>> debug the relocated kernel.
>> Any such tool that retrieves the symbol virtual address from vmlinux will
>> be confused.
>>
>
> I don't think this is practical given the virtual space constraints on i386
> systems.

Exactly.

Plus it is a lot of dangerous work.   Processing is a lot more
conservative.

Eric
-
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/