linux-kernel - Re: [patch 0/2] Protect crashkernel against BSS overlap

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:	16 Oct 2007 11:59:55 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	vgoyal@...ibm.com
Cc:	Bernhard Walle <bwalle@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kexec@...ts.infradead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [patch 0/2] Protect crashkernel against BSS overlap

Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...ibm.com> writes:

> Wouldn't it be better if we reserve the code, data and bss memory also
> using bootmem allocator and when somebody tries to reserve craskernel memory
> and if there is an overlap, boot memory allocator should scream?

Some x86 bootmem code right now relies on it not screaming (or at least not
erroring out). That would need to be fixed first. Or you make it a flag.
Would probably make sense, except that we already have too many bootmem
allocation variants :/

-Andi
-
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/