> > And this prevents the lowmemory to be secured by NX?
> What do you mean, when you say "lowmemory"?
I mean EF-Segments. Cause we got a kernel oops as we accidentally used
ioremap_nocache on a EF-Segment address.
Before that usage the EF-Segments weren't secured, afterwards they were.
We use no
On 4/25/07, Cestonaro, Thilo (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And this prevents the lowmemory to be secured by NX?
What do you mean, when you say "lowmemory"?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majord
> > > > CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G=y
> > > > CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y
> > > > CONFIG_X86_PAE=y
> > >
> > > Ok in highmem it's active, whats about lowmem?
> > > x86-64 is NX active for lowmem too AFAIK.
> >
> > It's more of an issue of having PAE enabled.
> > Without PAE you are not able to use the the NX bit.
> Tha
Cestonaro, Thilo (external) wrote:
> Hey,
>
>> CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G=y
>> CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y
>> CONFIG_X86_PAE=y
>
> Ok in highmem it's active, whats about lowmem?
It's not highmem vs lowmem, it is that HIGHMEM64G is required for
X86_PAE, which is required for NX support.
> x86-64 is NX active for lo
On 4/25/07, Tuncer Ayaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/25/07, Cestonaro, Thilo (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey,
>
> > CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G=y
> > CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y
> > CONFIG_X86_PAE=y
>
> Ok in highmem it's active, whats about lowmem?
> x86-64 is NX active for lowmem too AFAIK.
It's mor
On 4/25/07, Cestonaro, Thilo (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hey,
> CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G=y
> CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y
> CONFIG_X86_PAE=y
Ok in highmem it's active, whats about lowmem?
x86-64 is NX active for lowmem too AFAIK.
It's more of an issue of having PAE enabled.
Without PAE you are not abl
Hey,
> CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G=y
> CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y
> CONFIG_X86_PAE=y
Ok in highmem it's active, whats about lowmem?
x86-64 is NX active for lowmem too AFAIK.
Ciao Thilo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More major
"Cestonaro, Thilo \(external\)"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> is it right, that the NX Bit is not used under i386-Arch but under
> x86_64-Arch?
It is wrong.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More maj
On 4/24/07, William Heimbigner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Cestonaro, Thilo (external) wrote:
> Hey,
>
> is it right, that the NX Bit is not used under i386-Arch but
> under x86_64-Arch?
> When yes, is there a special argument for it not to be used?
>
> Ciao Thilo
I don't thi
> I don't think so - some i386 cpus definitely have support for the NX bit.
Ok, the cpu's do support it, but the kernel doesn't use it if it is active in
the bios.
> Would having this be supported in i386 help debugging (and security)
> significantly?
@William: I don't understand this question
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Cestonaro, Thilo (external) wrote:
Hey,
is it right, that the NX Bit is not used under i386-Arch but under x86_64-Arch?
When yes, is there a special argument for it not to be used?
Ciao Thilo
I don't think so - some i386 cpus definitely have support for the NX bit.
Would
Hey,
is it right, that the NX Bit is not used under i386-Arch but under x86_64-Arch?
When yes, is there a special argument for it not to be used?
Ciao Thilo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info
12 matches
Mail list logo
