[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <44F71F28.9040108@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 10:40:56 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: 7eggert@....de
CC: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Alon Bar-Lev <alon.barlev@...il.com>,
Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@...l.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
johninsd@....rr.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit
(ping)
Bodo Eggert wrote:
> Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> wrote:
>> On Wednesday 30 August 2006 20:59, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>
>>>> This is not entirely true...
>>>> All architectures sets saved_command_line variable...
>>>> So I can add __init to the saved_command_line and
>>>> copy its contents into kmalloced persistence_command_line at
>>>> main.c.
>>>>
>>> My opinion is that you should change saved_command_line (which already
>>> implies a copy) to be the kmalloc'd version and call the fixed-sized
>>> buffer something else.
>> It might be safer to rename everything. Then all users could be caught
>> and audited. This would ensure saved_command_line is not accessed
>> before the kmalloc'ed copy exists.
>
> If you set the new *saved_cmdline=saved_cmdline_init, the users don't need
> to be adjusted at all, and you won't have trouble with code that may be
> run before or after kmallocking (if it exists).
True for C code, but not for assembly.
-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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists