linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] i386: always clear bss

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: <463B508A.2030307@goop.org>
Date:	Fri, 04 May 2007 08:26:02 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: always clear bss

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Using 0x40 as a stack would be ok.
>   

OK.

> There are issues with CONFIG_RELOCATABLE and V!=P that I'm not
> comfortable with yet, because we can't tell the difference.

But it doesn't matter in this case, does it?  It just needs to find the
current address, whether it be virtual or physical, of the bss.  It
doesn't assume any particular offset.

When does the relocation happen?   Does the bzImage loader do it as part
of decompression?  Or does the kernel do it to itself?  (Not that it
makes any difference here.)

    J
-
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/