linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86 boot: add E820_RESVD

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:	Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:20:54 -0700
From:	"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
To:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, andi@...stfloor.org,
	mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86 boot: add E820_RESVD_KERN

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>>
>> * Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>>> > For find_e820_area, this is safe enough. But what about conflict
>>> > between setup_data and ebda or ramdisk?
>>>
>>> can you have setup_data and ebda at the same time?
>>>
>>> setup_data and ramdisk should be ok, because bootloader is supposed to
>>> make them not to be conflicts.
>>
>> the more sanity checks we do before relying on some crutial data, the
>> better. It's easier to panic or sanitize data in some structured way and
>> complain about it in the syslog than to let things get corrupted. Boot
>> loaders are ... not unknown to be have bugs too, at times.
>
> to address Ying's concern, we could let reserve_setup_data
> call reserve_early in addition to e820_update_range...
>
> reserve_early will panic if RAMDISK overlap efi setup_data...
>

Ying,
please check the attached patch

YH

View attachment "reserve_setup_data_v3.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (6085 bytes)