linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] x86/boot: Add xloadflags bits for 5-level kernel checking

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:   Sat, 6 Apr 2019 09:40:53 +0800
From:   Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
        mingo@...nel.org, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com, dyoung@...hat.com,
        x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] x86/boot: Add xloadflags bits for 5-level kernel
 checking

On 04/05/19 at 10:23pm, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2019, Baoquan He wrote:
> 
> > Add two bits XLF_5LEVEL and XLF_5LEVEL_ENABLED for 5-level kernel.
> > Bit XLF_5LEVEL indicates if 5-level related code is contained
> > in this kernel.
> > Bit XLF_5LEVEL_ENABLED indicates if CONFIG_X86_5LEVEL=y is set.
> > 
> > They are being used in later patch to check if kexec/kdump kernel
> > is loaded in right place.
> 
> Only XLF_5LEVEL is checked. So what's the second flag for?

I put the explanation why only XLF_5LEVEL is checked in cover letter.
Will add them in this log.