linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] XEN_DOMAIN

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4E98D739.4000705@oracle.com>
Date:	Fri, 14 Oct 2011 17:43:37 -0700
From:	Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uvarov@...cle.com>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
CC:	xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	konrad.wilk@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] XEN_DOMAIN_MEMORY options.

On 10/14/2011 04:41 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 10/14/2011 04:33 PM, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
>> On 10/14/2011 04:00 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>> On 10/14/2011 03:36 PM, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> Please find here patches for XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY:
>>>>
>>>> [PATCH 1/2] xen: Fix XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY to be selectable
>>>> [PATCH 2/2] xen: Make XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY have more sensible
>>>> defaults for 32-bit builds
>>>
>>> What's the rationale?
>>>
>>>       J
>>
>> The first patch is actually bug fix. You can not define just "int"
>> without description in Kconfig. As the result this option will not be
>> visible in menuconfig. Even if you will change it in .config make
>> oldconfig will set it up for default value. So you need to add any
>> description to it as all others int options have.
>
> No, that was deliberate, because I don't really think there's a need to
> change it.
>

 From that point of view it's not clear why this option is still in Kconfig?

Jeremy, can you please share more details about this? I see people are 
having troubles with this option and in different kernels I see 
different work arounds  for it. For example:
http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2011-01/msg01841.html

Maxim.
>>
>> Second patch is more optional and it's just suggestion to use for 32
>> bit more corresponding value.
>
> While it would be very silly to put 128GB of actual RAM on a 32-bit
> machine, systems can have non-contiguous RAM placed at high addresses,
> which would no longer be accessible.
>
>      J

--
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/