linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -mm 2/2] Hibernation: Arbitrary boot kernel support on x86

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: <200708252027.26721.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Sat, 25 Aug 2007 20:27:25 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 2/2] Hibernation: Arbitrary boot kernel support on x86_64

On Friday, 24 August 2007 22:46, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>
> > 
> > Make it possible to restore a hibernation image on x86_64 with the help of a
> > kernel different from the one in the image.
> > 
> > The idea is to split the core restoration code into two separate parts and to
> > place each of them in a different page.  The first part belongs to the boot
> 
> What happens in case where both parts want to be
> at the same place? (Like kernel being restored is 4KB smaller, so that
> routines now collide?)

Bad things, but I can't see how to avoid that reliably.

Greetings,
Rafael
-
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/