From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757463AbcIGOfB (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2016 10:35:01 -0400 Received: from out03.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.233]:35391 "EHLO out03.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751970AbcIGOe6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2016 10:34:58 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Thiago Jung Bauermann Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-ima-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Young , Vivek Goyal , Baoquan He , Michael Ellerman , Stewart Smith , Mimi Zohar , Eric Richter , Andrew Morton , Balbir Singh References: <1472579105-26296-1-git-send-email-bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <8760q7lswz.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 09:19:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: <8760q7lswz.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> (Eric W. Biederman's message of "Wed, 07 Sep 2016 08:51:24 -0500") Message-ID: <871t0vlrlv.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=1bhdvN-0001j6-BO;;;mid=<871t0vlrlv.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=97.119.97.64;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX19tPX0KQfx2O7D/0vc+hY8tOPVYARs5Fag= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 97.119.97.64 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 TVD_RCVD_IP Message was received from an IP address * 0.7 XMSubLong Long Subject * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: No description available. * 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% * [score: 0.5000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa06 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 T_TooManySym_02 5+ unique symbols in subject * 0.0 T_TooManySym_01 4+ unique symbols in subject X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa06 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Thiago Jung Bauermann X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Timing: total 576 ms - load_scoreonly_sql: 0.03 (0.0%), signal_user_changed: 3.8 (0.7%), b_tie_ro: 2.1 (0.4%), parse: 0.70 (0.1%), extract_message_metadata: 10 (1.7%), get_uri_detail_list: 0.92 (0.2%), tests_pri_-1000: 3.2 (0.5%), tests_pri_-950: 1.24 (0.2%), tests_pri_-900: 0.98 (0.2%), tests_pri_-400: 48 (8.3%), check_bayes: 47 (8.2%), b_tokenize: 6 (1.0%), b_tok_get_all: 12 (2.1%), b_comp_prob: 1.82 (0.3%), b_tok_touch_all: 23 (3.9%), b_finish: 0.68 (0.1%), tests_pri_0: 502 (87.1%), check_dkim_signature: 0.44 (0.1%), check_dkim_adsp: 22 (3.9%), tests_pri_500: 4.3 (0.7%), rewrite_mail: 0.00 (0.0%) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] kexec_file: Add buffer hand-over for the next kernel X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes: > Thiago Jung Bauermann writes: > >> Hello, >> >> The purpose of this new version of the series is to fix a small issue that >> I found, which is that the kernel doesn't remove the memory reservation >> for the hand-over buffer it received from the previous kernel in the >> device tree it sets up for the next kernel. The result is that for each >> successive kexec, a stale hand-over buffer is left behind, wasting memory. >> >> This is fixed by changes to kexec_free_handover_buffer and >> setup_handover_buffer in patch 2. The other change is to fix checkpatch >> warnings in the last patch. > > This is fundamentally broken. You do not increase the integrity of a > system by dropping integrity checks. > > No. No. No. No. > > Nacked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" To be constructive the way we have handled similiar situations in the past (hotplu memory) is to call kexec_load again. Eric