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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070608144737.GZ6909@holomorphy.com>
Date:	Fri, 8 Jun 2007 07:47:37 -0700
From:	William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>
To:	Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ak@...e.de,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, lkml@....ca
Subject: Re: divorce CONFIG_X86_PAE from CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G

On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 10:07:52AM +0200, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> Is this really needed? I can see why VMSPLIT_{2,3}G_OPT would
> depend on !HIGHMEM, but why would they depend on !X86_PAE?

The only reason they depend on !HIGHMEM is because handling for
1GB-unaligned splits is unimplemented for PAE, which formerly only
occurred in conjunction with HIGHMEM64G. That said, they were oriented
toward avoiding highmem on laptops, hence the broader !HIGHMEM
constraint. The entire point of the patch is to add an option to use
PAE without highmem for the purposes of NX and secondarily expanded
swapspace, at which point CONFIG_VMSPLIT_[23]G_OPT need some other way
besides !HIGHMEM to exclude PAE, such as specifying !X86_PAE directly.


-- wli
-
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ