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]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFxgsZCqJdhZJ3ztyTTFPPgkn_aH6d4ziW1g0YJKc++0+A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 23 Jan 2018 09:31:16 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv6, RESEND 4/4] x86/boot/compressed/64: Handle 5-level
 paging boot if kernel is above 4G

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 9:09 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov
<kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> But if the bootloader put the kernel above 4G (not sure if anybody does
> this), we would lose control as soon as paging is disabled, because the
> code becomes unreachable to the CPU.

I do wonder if we need this. Why would a bootloader ever put the data
above 4G? Does this really happen?  Wouldn't it be easier to just say
"bootloaders better put the kernel in the low 4G"?

                Linus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ