From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Michal Clapinski <mclapinski@google.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] x86/boot/compressed: Fix avoiding memmap in physical KASLR
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2025 13:29:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6bd76106-339f-4204-a418-738b7ee545ab@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251022233743.1134103-1-mclapinski@google.com>
On 10/22/25 16:37, Michal Clapinski wrote:
...
> But it would not disable physical KASLR for:
> memmap=1G!4G memmap=1G!5G memmap=1G!6G memmap=1G!7G memmap=1G!8G
> since the whole function would be called 5 times and the last `if`
> would never trigger.
I'm missing something about how this works.
The:
static int i;
is static so should be keeping state across function calls. For the
purposes of checking 'i', why does it matter if the function is called
one time with 5 arguments or 5 times with 1? Doesn't 'i' end up at the
same value either way?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-23 20:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-22 23:37 Michal Clapinski
2025-10-23 8:24 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2025-10-23 18:30 ` Chris Li
2025-10-23 23:33 ` Michał Cłapiński
2025-10-23 20:29 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2025-10-23 23:23 ` Michał Cłapiński
2025-10-24 18:21 ` Dave Hansen
2025-10-24 21:27 ` Michał Cłapiński
2025-11-06 14:59 ` Michał Cłapiński
2025-11-06 15:48 ` Dave Hansen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6bd76106-339f-4204-a418-738b7ee545ab@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=chrisl@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mclapinski@google.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®