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]

Date:	Sat, 25 Aug 2007 11:32:49 -0700 (PDT)
From:	david@...g.hm
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
cc:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	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 Sat, 25 Aug 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> 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.

can you at least detect it reliably? (feed a program both kernel images 
and have it tell you 'yes/no')

David Lang