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  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:   Tue, 8 Jan 2019 09:32:59 -0800
From:   Dave Hansen <>
To:     Pingfan Liu <>
        Thomas Gleixner <>,
        Ingo Molnar <>, Borislav Petkov <>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <>,
        Dave Hansen <>,
        Andy Lutomirski <>,
        Peter Zijlstra <>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <>,
        Len Brown <>,
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] x86/mm: remove bottom-up allocation style for

On 1/7/19 10:13 PM, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 1:42 AM Dave Hansen <> wrote:
>> Why is this 0x100000 open-coded?  Why is this needed *now*?
> Memory under 1MB should be used by BIOS. For x86_64, after
> e820__memblock_setup(), the memblock allocator has already been ready
> to work. But there are two factors to in order to
> set_alloc_range(0x100000, end). The major one is to be compatible with
> x86_32, please refer to alloc_low_pages->memblock_find_in_range() uses
> [min_pfn_mapped, max_pfn_mapped] to limit the range, which is ready to
> be allocated from. The minor one is to prevent unexpected allocation
> from memblock allocator through allow_low_pages() at very early stage.

Wow, that's a ton of critical information which was neither commented
upon or referenced in the changelog.  Can you fix this up in the next
version, please?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists