linux-kernel - Re: Edited kexec_load(2) [kexec_file

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

Date:	Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:10:59 +0000 (UTC)
From:	Scot Doyle <lkml14@...tdoyle.com>
To:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
cc:	"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-man@...r.kernel.org" <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kexec Mailing List <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: Edited kexec_load(2) [kexec_file_load()] man page for review

On Wed, 28 Jan 2015, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 09:14:03PM +0000, Scot Doyle wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Jan 2015, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 04:49:34PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> > > > Hello Vivek,
> > > > 
> > > > >> I've made various adjustments to the page in the light of your comments
> > > > >> above. Thanks!
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you for following it up and improving kexec man page.
> > > > 
> > > > You're welcome. So, by now, I've made quite a lot of changes
> > > > (including adding a number of cases under ERRORS). I think the revised
> > > > kexec_load/kexec_file_load page is pretty much ready to go, but would
> > > > you be willing to give the text below a check over first?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Hi Michael,
> > > 
> > > I had a quick look and it looks good to me.
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > Vivek
> > 
> > When I tested, kexec_file_load required CONFIG_RELOCATABLE. Is the same 
> > true for kexec_load? Would it make sense to note this in the man pages 
> > along with the need for CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE, etc? Or as an error message?
> 
> Hmm.., I can't see an explicity dependency between RELOCATABLE and
> KEXEC. Both KEXEC and KEXEC_FILE should be able to load a kernel
> even if it had RELOCATABLE=n.
> 
> Just that kernel will run from the address it has been built for.
> 
> Thanks
> Vivek

Confusing, right? kexec_file_load returns -ENOEXEC and dmesg says 
"kexec-bzImage64: XLF_CAN_BE_LOADED_ABOVE_4G is not set." which leads to
arch/x86/boot/header.S line 396:

#if defined(CONFIG_RELOCATABLE) && defined(CONFIG_X86_64)  
   /* kernel/boot_param/ramdisk could be loaded above 4g */
# define XLF1 XLF_CAN_BE_LOADED_ABOVE_4G
#else
# define XLF1 0
#endif

--
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/