linux-kernel - Re: divorce CONFIG_X86_PAE from CONFIG

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: <4668D089.5090209@zytor.com>
Date:	Thu, 07 Jun 2007 20:44:09 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Subject: Re: divorce CONFIG_X86_PAE from CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G

William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>>> !CONFIG_X86_PAE && CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G doesn't make sense and is not allowed
>>> by this patch. CONFIG_X86_PAE && !CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G works here.
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 08:38:22PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> But what's the point?
>> If you're going to divorce these, at least do it in a way that makes
>> sense, specifically the two independent variables are PAE and HIGHMEM.
>> PAE and !HIGHMEM does make (some amount of) sense, due to no kmap overhead.
> 
> Beg your pardon? Are you reading the patch description correctly?
> 

I mean, with your patch CONFIG_HIGHMEM4G versus CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G really
don't make sense as separate selections anymore.

	-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/