linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/boot: Introduce the kernel

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 2 Oct 2019 14:00:18 +0200
From:   Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>
To:     "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:     linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, bp@...en8.de, corbet@....net,
        dpsmith@...rtussolutions.com, eric.snowberg@...cle.com,
        kanth.ghatraju@...cle.com, konrad.wilk@...cle.com,
        mingo@...hat.com, ross.philipson@...cle.com, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/boot: Introduce the kernel_info

On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 03:28:01PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 2019-10-01 04:41, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> >
> > OK, so, this is more or less what I had in my v3 patch before sending
> > this email. So, it looks that I am on good track. Great! Though I am not
> > sure that we should have magic for chunked objects. If yes could you
> > explain why? I would just leave len for chunked objects.
> >
>
> It makes it easier to validate the contents (bugs happen...), and would allow
> for multiple chunks that could come from different object files if it ever
> becomes necessary for some reason.

OK.

> We could also just say that dynamic chunks don't even have pointers, and let
> the boot loader just walk the list.

Yeah... That seams simpler. I will do that.

> >> Also "InfO" is a pretty hideous magic. In general, all-ASCII magics have much
> >> higher risk of collision than *RANDOM* binary numbers. However, for a chunked
> >> architecture they do have the advantage that they can be used also as a human
> >> name or file name for the chunk, e.,g. in sysfs, so maybe something like
> >> "LnuX" or even "LToP" for the top-level chunk might make sense.
> >>
> >> How does that sound?
> >
> > Well, your proposals are more cryptic, especially the second one, than
> > mine but I tend to agree that more *RANDOM* magics are better. So,
> > I would choose "LToP" if you decipher it for me. Linux Top?
> >
>
> Yes, Linux top [structure].

Thx!

Daniel