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:	Wed, 19 Dec 2012 23:04:43 +0100
From:	Borislav Petkov <>
To:	Yinghai Lu <>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <>, Ingo Molnar <>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,, Matt Fleming <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 03/27] x86, boot: move verify_cpu.S and no_longmode
 after 0x200

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 01:58:57PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Borislav Petkov <> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 07:44:55PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> >
> > So this explains what you're doing but I'd like to know why?
> >
> > Why do you need to free some more room between startup_32 and
> > startup_64? Do you need this room in another patch, maybe the next one:
> >
> > "[PATCH v7 14/27] x86, boot: Move lldt/ltr out of 64bit code section"
> >
> > Is that so? If yes, please write that in the commit message so that we
> > know why you're doing that change.
> duplicate next patch commit log here. no, that's too long.

Sorry, I'm not suggesting to duplicate the patch commit log here -
simply say instead:

"We are short of space before address 0x200 which is the 64-bit entry
point (startup_64). Since we're going to need that space in the next
patch, and, according to hpa, startup_64 has become an ABI and thus
cannot be moved, move function verify_cpu and no_longmode further down."

See, clear and simple.



Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists