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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 15:44:16 +0530 From: "Sunil Naidu" <akula2.shark@...il.com> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: More about dmesg stuff, this time 2.6.20-rc5 Hello, I did find this dmesg for the kernel 2.6.20-rc5 Linux version 2.6.20-rc5-Typhoon (root@...hoon) (gcc version 4.1.1 20061011 (Red Hat 4.1.1-30)) #1 SMP Sat Jan 20 15:00:20 IST 2007 BIOS-provided physical RAM map: sanitize start sanitize end copy_e820_map() start: 0000000000000000 size: 000000000009fc00 end: 000000000009fc00 type: 1 copy_e820_map() type is E820_RAM copy_e820_map() start: 000000000009fc00 size: 0000000000000400 end: 00000000000a0000 type: 2 copy_e820_map() start: 00000000000e6000 size: 000000000001a000 end: 0000000000100000 type: 2 copy_e820_map() start: 0000000000100000 size: 000000001f62f800 end: 000000001f72f800 type: 1 copy_e820_map() type is E820_RAM copy_e820_map() start: 000000001f72f800 size: 0000000000000800 end: 000000001f730000 type: 4 copy_e820_map() start: 000000001f730000 size: 0000000000010000 end: 000000001f740000 type: 3 copy_e820_map() start: 000000001f740000 size: 00000000000b0000 end: 000000001f7f0000 type: 4 copy_e820_map() start: 000000001f7f0000 size: 0000000000010000 end: 000000001f800000 type: 2 copy_e820_map() start: 00000000e0000000 size: 0000000010000000 end: 00000000f0000000 type: 2 copy_e820_map() start: 00000000fed13000 size: 0000000000007000 end: 00000000fed1a000 type: 2 copy_e820_map() start: 00000000fed1c000 size: 0000000000084000 end: 00000000feda0000 type: 2 What are these sanitize start, sanitize end, copy_e820_map() about? Memory check? After this, dmesg is almost same as in 2.6.19.2. But here is another observation:: migration_cost=18 for 2.6.19.2 migration_cost=87 for 2.6.20-rc5 How does this parameter value impacts the kernel? Lastly, this about Intel RNG: For 2.6.19.2 intel_rng: FWH not detected For 2.6.20-rc5 intel_rng: Firmware space is locked read-only. If you can't or intel_rng: don't want to disable this in firmware setup, and if intel_rng: you are certain that your system has a functional intel_rng: RNG, try using the 'no_fwh_detect' option. Is this a bug? Or, something wrong with my H/W? ~Akula2 - 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