linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -mm -v5 0/3] i386/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: <p73odeyxi3u.fsf@crumb.suse.de>
Date:	17 Oct 2007 10:25:57 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
	Chandramouli Narayanan <mouli@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm -v5 0/3] i386/x86_64 boot: 32-bit boot protocol

"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com> writes:

> Do you think it is a good idea to check the collision between setup data
> and memory area used during kernel boot through bootmem allocator?

You can't solve this through bootmem because x86-64 allocates memory
in several places before bootmem (using functions in e820.c) Right now
this is quite hackish with hard coded areas to avoid conflicts.  But I
recently had a need to allocate more memory that early too and changed
the code to a generic early reservation interface. With that it would
be relatively easy to reserve.

-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/