> On Jun 21, 2021, at 11:18 AM, Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 03:39:45PM +0000, Qing Zhao wrote: >> So, if “pattern value” is “0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF”, then it’s a valid canonical >> virtual memory address. However, for most OS, “0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF” should >> be not in user space. >> >> My question is, is “0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF” good for pointer? Or >> “0xAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA” better? > > I think 0xFF repeating is fine for this version. Everything else is a > "nice to have" for the pattern-init, IMO. :)
Okay, thank you! Qing > > -- > Kees Cook
