| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20070927231552.GC4755@cosmic.amd.com> Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 17:15:52 -0600 From: "Jordan Crouse" <jordan.crouse@....com> To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> cc: jkeating@...hat.com, "Joerg Pommnitz" <pommnitz@...oo.com>, "Chuck Ebbert" <cebbert@...hat.com>, "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de> Subject: Re: More E820 brokenness On 27/09/07 15:47 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Jordan Crouse wrote: > > > > Breaks on the Geode - original behavior. > > > > I think that having boot_prams.e820_entries != 0 makes the kernel > > assume the e820 data is correct. > > > > Okay, now I'm utterly baffled how 2.6.22 ever worked on this Geode, > because this, to the best of my reading, mimics the 2.6.22 behavior > exactly. DID IT REALLY, and/or did you make any kind of configuration > changes? I copied in a 2.6.22 kernel to see that it really did work, and it did. But here's the crazy part - I did a dmesg, and it looks like it *is* using e820 data, and it looks complete (I see the entire map - including the ACPI and reserved blocks way up high). So apparently it was the 2.6.22 code that was buggy, but reading it, I don't immediately see how. Jordan -- Jordan Crouse Systems Software Development Engineer Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. - 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