linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 01/12] x86, boot: move verify

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <874nkh3mip.fsf@xmission.com>
Date:	Thu, 22 Nov 2012 03:27:58 -0800
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/12] x86, boot: move verify_cpu.S after 0x200

"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> writes:

> Quite certain something depends on it.

It would not surprise me at all that there is a dependency, if we have
not had a better way to report the 64bit entry point.  I just wanted to
make the context clear as that was confused in the discussion.

Note that having a 32bit entry point at offset 0 is as much of an ABI.

I am surprised that there are legitimate reasons to bulk up the 32bit
entry point code before the 0x200.  Everything that we are doing at that
point is architectural.

Eric
--
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/