linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL

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]

Message-Id: <200608272254.13871.ak@suse.de>
Date:	Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:54:13 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Alon Bar-Lev <alon.barlev@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)

On Sunday 27 August 2006 21:32, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> > 
> > Just increasing that constant caused various lilo setups to not boot
> > anymore. I don't know who is actually to blame, just wanting to
> > point out that this "obvious" patch isn't actually that obvious.
> > 
> 
> How would that even be possible (unless you recompiled LILO with the new 
> headers)?  There would be no difference in the memory image at the point 
> LILO hands off to the kernel.

AFAIK the problem was that some EDD data got overwritten.

> 
> In order to reproduce this we need some details about your "various LILO 
> setups", or this will remain as a source of cargo cult programming.

You can search the mailing list archives, it's all in there if you don't
belive me.

-Andi

-
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/