| 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: <87od7ovcpj.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 19:27:04 +0200 From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> To: Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net> Cc: "Parag Warudkar" <parag.warudkar@...il.com>, "Adrian Bunk" <bunk@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: How to reduce the number of open kernel bugs Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net> writes: > If the hardware works > perfectly in every other OS It depends. There used to be the famous case (not longer true now) that older Linux allocated memory from the top of the memory down and other OS generally allocated it the from bottom to up and when some of your top memory was broken Linux would often hit problems where other OS did not. Also there can be the case when some OS use hardware quite differently or different hardware features than other. Standard case for example used to be that there were a few platforms where the SMM code had 64bit bugs and of course you would only hit them when running a 64bit OS which was Linux. A modern OS is a very complicated system with tens of millions of code lines and you can't assume they all program the hardware in the same way. Simple truths are often wrong. - and possibly even previous versions of Linux - Now that is a more interesting case. But regressions are always taken seriously by all maintainers I know. -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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists