Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)

Matt Domsch wrote:

No reason.  I was just trying to be careful, not leaving data in the
upper bits of those registers going uninitialized.  If we know they're
not being used ever, then it's not a problem.  But I don't think
that's the source of the command line size concern, is it?

No, it's treating the command line as a fixed buffer, as opposed to a null-terminated string. This was always a bug, by the way.

	-hpa

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
    • From: Matt Domsch <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
    • From: Alon Bar-Lev <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
    • From: Alon Bar-Lev <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
    • From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
    • From: Matt Domsch <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: 2.6.18-rc4-mm3 -- intel8x0 audio busted
• Next by Date: Re: 2.6.18-rc4-mm[1,2,3] -- Network card not getting assigned an "eth" device name
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit (ping)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]