On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 07:38:24 -0800
Tushar Sugandhi wrote:
> ima_dump_measurement_list() is called during kexec 'load', which may
> result in loss of IMA measurements during kexec soft reboot. It needs
> to be called during kexec 'execute'.
>
> This patch includes the following changes:
> - Cal
Hi,
On 05/07/24 at 09:18am, Rik van Riel wrote:
> While taking a kernel core dump with makedumpfile on a larger system,
> softlockup messages often appear.
>
> While softlockup warnings can be harmless, they can also interfere
> with things like RCU freeing memory, which can be problematic when
>
On Wed, 8 May 2024 10:11:35 -0700 Kees Cook wrote:
> > Split this per subsystem, please.
>
> I've done a few painful API transitions before, and I don't think the
> complexity of these changes needs a per-subsystem constification pass. I
> think this series is the right approach, but that patch
On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 08:12:34PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 09:54:35 +0200 Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > The series was split from my larger series sysctl-const series [0].
> > It only focusses on the proc_handlers but is an important step to be
> > able to move all static d
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 02:04:22PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 06:37:19PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > "second kernel" is nomenclature kexec folks are using, but okay.
>
> And the "third kernel" is the one which got kexec-ed the second time?
>
> You can make it
On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 02:30:05PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> To prepare for the addition of support for MADT wakeup structure version
"In order to support... "
> 1, it is necessary to provide more appropriate names for the fields in
> the structure.
>
> The field 'mailbox_version' renam
On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 02:30:03PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> Subject: Re: [PATCHv10 11/18] x86/mm: Make e820_end_ram_pfn() cover
> E820_TYPE_ACPI ranges
^^^
e820__end_of_ram_pfn()
> e820__end_of_ram_pfn() is used to calculate max_pfn w
On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 06:37:19PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> "second kernel" is nomenclature kexec folks are using, but okay.
And the "third kernel" is the one which got kexec-ed the second time?
You can make it: "The second, kexec-ed kernel" and then it is perfectly
clear.
> > > + /*
>
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 04:09:40PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> Hey Joel,
>
...
> > # Motivation
> > As I read it, the motivation for these constification efforts are:
> > 1. It provides increased safety: Having things in .rodata section reduces
> > the
> >attack surface. This is especial
Kees
Could you comment on the feasibility of this alternative from the
Control Flow Integrity perspective. My proposal is to change the
proc_handler to void* and back in the same release. So there would not
be a kernel released with a void* proc_handler.
> > However, there is an alternative way t
10 matches
Mail list logo
