linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: fix mm.txt documentation

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <481AD528.1090809@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 02 May 2008 10:47:36 +0200
From:	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, mingo@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: fix mm.txt documentation

On 05/02/2008 10:38 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> yep, the image was in a 128 MB chunk from which 88 MB was left empty and 
>> modules started at the next 128 MB boundary. The largest image i ever 
>> had was around 44MB, so i doubt it's an issue in practice. Mind doing a 
>> patch that reinstates it, by lowering the 512 image size limit to 508 
>> MB? [4MB should be more than enough in practice]
> 
> Actually you could even limit to the exact know size of the kernel (rounded
> up to 2MB) after early boot. Then the protection would be even better and less
> aliasing to deal with for pageattr.c. Just invalidate the left over PMDs.

Doesn't cleanup_highmap() do that? ... so I guess we don't need the hole? Or do 
we when we reach the limit to not go over to modules?
--
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/