linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] shorten the x86_64 boot setup GDT to what the comment says

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:	Thu, 9 Nov 2006 14:31:44 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To:	"Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com>
Cc:	"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com,
	"LKML" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] shorten the x86_64 boot setup GDT to what the comment says

On Thursday 09 November 2006 16:31, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> 09.11.06 14:13 >>>
> >>
> >> Stephen Tweedie has written up a patch to fix the Xen side and will be
> >> submitting that to those folks. But that doesn't excuse the GDT limit
> >> being a magnitude too big.
> >
> >Added thanks
>
> Once at this - why not set it to the *correct* value, just like i386 does,
> and update the comment at once? Namely, why would you expect to
> never run into the original problem again if there are still possible
> selectors pointing into invalid, yet within limits parts of the GDT?

Ok I will use an offset.

-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/