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  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:   Mon, 23 Jan 2017 16:48:50 +0800
From:   Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
To:     Xunlei Pang <xlpang@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
        x86@...nel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Robert LeBlanc <robert@...lancnet.us>,
        Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/crash: Update the stale comment in
 reserve_crashkernel()

Hi, Xunlei

On 01/23/17 at 02:48pm, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> CRASH_KERNEL_ADDR_MAX has been missing for a long time,
> update it with more detailed explanation.
> 
> Cc: Robert LeBlanc <robert@...lancnet.us>
> Cc: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Xunlei Pang <xlpang@...hat.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> index 4cfba94..c32a167 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> @@ -575,7 +575,9 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void)
>  	/* 0 means: find the address automatically */
>  	if (crash_base <= 0) {
>  		/*
> -		 *  kexec want bzImage is below CRASH_KERNEL_ADDR_MAX
> +		 * Set CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX upper bound for crash memory
> +		 * as old kexec-tools loads bzImage below that, unless
> +		 * "crashkernel=size[KMG],high" is specified.

There is already comment before the define of those macros, also
there are 32bit case which has a different reason about 512M there as
well.

So it looks better to just drop the one line comment without adding
further comments here.
>  		 */
>  		crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(CRASH_ALIGN,
>  						    high ? CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX
> -- 
> 1.8.3.1
> 

Thanks
Dave

Powered by blists - more mailing lists