* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh, sorry, we're talking about two different patches. I sent in a
> different patch yesterday, because Andi Kleen didn't seem very
> enthusiastic about fixnx2.patch. Here's the patch that I sent
> yesterday (attached as file init.c.patch).
ah
Hayes, Stuart wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Ingo Molnar wrote:
there's one problem with the patch: it breaks things that need the
low 1MB executable (e.g. APM bios32 calls). It would at a minimum
be needed to exclude the BIOS ar
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> there's one problem with the patch: it breaks things that need the
>>> low 1MB executable (e.g. APM bios32 calls). It would at a minimum be
>>> needed to exclude the BIOS area in 0xd-0xf.
>>>
>
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > there's one problem with the patch: it breaks things that need the
> > low 1MB executable (e.g. APM bios32 calls). It would at a minimum be
> > needed to exclude the BIOS area in 0xd-0xf.
> >
> > Ingo
>
> I wr
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> there's one problem with the patch: it breaks things that need the
> low 1MB executable (e.g. APM bios32 calls). It would at a minimum be
> needed to exclude the BIOS area in 0xd-0xf.
>
> Ingo
I wrote it to make everything below 1MB executable, if it isn't RAM
there's one problem with the patch: it breaks things that need the low
1MB executable (e.g. APM bios32 calls). It would at a minimum be needed
to exclude the BIOS area in 0xd-0xf.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a mes
Andi Kleen wrote:
> I personally wouldn't like doing this NX cleanup very late like you did but
> instead directly after the early NX setup.
I've thought about it more, and come up with another patch. All it does is
sets up the PTEs correctly from the beginning, breaking up large pages if
neces
>>
>> Andi--
>>
>> I made another pass at this. This does roughly the same thing, but
>> it doesn't create the new "change_page_attr_perm()" functions. With
>> this patch, the change to init.c (cleanup_nx_in_kerneltext()) is
>> optional.
>> I changed __change_page_attr() so that, if the page t
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 03:02:26PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Sorry for the late answer]
> Hayes, Stuart wrote:
> >> So, if I understand correctly what's going on in x86_64, your fix
> >> wouldn't be applicable to i386. In x86_64, every large page has a
> >> correct "ref_prot" that is the
randy_dunlap wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 15:02:26 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Hayes, Stuart wrote:
So, if I understand correctly what's going on in x86_64, your fix
wouldn't be applicable to i386. In x86_64, every large page has a
correct "ref_prot" that is the normal setti
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 16:35:51 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| randy_dunlap wrote:
| > On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 15:02:26 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| >
| >> Andi--
| >>
| >> I made another pass at this. This does roughly the same thing, but
| >> it doesn't create the new "change_page_attr_perm()" f
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 15:02:26 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Hayes, Stuart wrote:
| >> So, if I understand correctly what's going on in x86_64, your fix
| >> wouldn't be applicable to i386. In x86_64, every large page has a
| >> correct "ref_prot" that is the normal setting for that page... but i
Hayes, Stuart wrote:
>> So, if I understand correctly what's going on in x86_64, your fix
>> wouldn't be applicable to i386. In x86_64, every large page has a
>> correct "ref_prot" that is the normal setting for that page... but in
>> i386, the kernel text area does not--it should ideally be split
13 matches
Mail list logo
