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: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:03:46 -0800 From: hpa@...or.com To: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name> CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>, "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 0/4] x86: 5-level related changes into decompression code On November 29, 2017 12:58:15 PM PST, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> wrote: >> We're really early in the boot -- startup_64 in decompression code -- >and >> I don't know a way print a message there. Is there a way? >> >> no_longmode handled by just hanging the machine. Is it enough for >no_la57 >> case too? > >The way to handle it is to check it early in the real mode boot code >when you >can still print messages. That is how missing long mode is handled. > >-Andi Yes, and that test should be done automatically. However, we also check at several later points in case that code is bypassed by the bootloader. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists