linux-kernel - Re: Kernel vs user memory

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: <49f90a801003181829w63b3e96fp79c015b15b8d535b@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:29:07 -0400
From:	Siddhartha Chhabra <siddhartha.chhabra@...il.com>
To:	Bryan Donlan <bdonlan@...il.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Kernel vs user memory

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Bryan Donlan <bdonlan@...il.com> wrote:

>
> That is correct. The kernel can avoid a PF if it wants to by ensuring
> the page tables are set up properly from the start; and physical
> addresses below a certain value (which varies by architecture) can be
> accessed directly without any setup at all.
>

Thank you for your time, this discussion was really helpful.

Thanks once again
Sid
--
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/