linux-kernel - Re: Extending boot protocol & bzImage for paravirt

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:	Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:42:32 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
CC:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Extending boot protocol & bzImage for paravirt_ops

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> 
> Well, I think we can safely say that its something that's only
> meaningful in 32/64-bit mode, so we aren't constrained by the real-mode
> address space.
> 
> One of my goals in this project is to make the boot image, in some way,
> completely define which memory it needs it get started.  That means that
> the boot loader can either place things knowing they'll avoid the boot
> image and/or definitively know that the image is unloadable.
> 
> So I don't think its strictly necessary to pre-define what memory this
> object can use, since I think it can be safely determined dynamically.
> 

That's a method of defining the memory space.

I think the current definition is suitable for entering at the 16-bit
entry point.

	-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/