| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 22:03:43 +0100 From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org> To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>, Linux EFI <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, X86-ML <x86@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86, efi: Add an efi= kernel command line parameter On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 11:02:18PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:50:57PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > What do you mean by "call them"? I don't think we ever want to call by > > physical address, other than maybe in the kexec case. The only reason > > we really care about the physical addresses being mapped 1:1 is that > > some pointers may not have been updated. > > I want to be able to call the runtime services in the kexec kernel. > Which means, the kexec kernel would simply map the runtime code/data > regions 1:1 and then use the physical addresses to call the runtime > services. > > Question is: would that work even if SetVirtualAddressMap has already > run in the original kernel and with virtual addresses? No. You'll need to have an option for that case. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists