linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix ARCH=um segfault on x86-64.

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: <20090310142929.GG3157@hack>
Date:	Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:29:29 +0800
From:	Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:	Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>
Cc:	Am??rico Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
	user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix ARCH=um segfault on x86-64.

On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 09:35:43AM -0500, Jeff Dike wrote:
>On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 07:18:34PM +0800, Am??rico Wang wrote:
>> It does work well x86_64, but my question is that whether this will
>> break i386 or not, since before, CONFIG_3_LEVEL_PGTABLES depends on
>> EXPERIMENTAL on i386, this patch removes it.
>
>As long as CONFIG_3_LEVEL_PGTABLES is off on 32-bit, it should be fine.
>
>It did work, last I checked, but 3-level page tables on 32-bit is a
>very rarely used combination, and not useful.
>

So this patch should be fine, right? :)

Thanks for your comments!

-- 
Do what you love, f**k the rest! F**k the regulations!
 
--
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/