linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] i386: additional fix for making ioremap() accept64-bit addresses

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:34:09 +0100
From:	"Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com>
To:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	<hpa@...nel.org>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: additional fix for making ioremap()
	accept64-bit addresses

>>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> 04.04.08 14:55 >>>
>
>* Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com> wrote:
>
>> The recent change to __ioremap()'s first parameter's type didn't yield 
>> the intended effect as the first conditional inside the function would 
>> still have filtered out any addresses with bits [63:32] set. Correct 
>> last_addr's type and at once also add a check that the address range 
>> doesn't extend into space hardware cannot support even theoretically.
>
>i fixed this in x86.git more than a week ago, see:
>
>|  Subject: x86: ioremap of 64-bit resource on 32-bit kernel fix
>|  From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
>|  Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 08:31:17 +0100
>
>but since 64-bit resources never worked on 32-bit and the initiator 
>regression causing this discussion turned out to be something else, i 
>delayed this fix as .26 material.
>
>the PHYSICAL_MASK fix looks good as an additional check - could you 
>please resend it against x86.git/latest which has my fix already?

No need to do this afaics: you've already got the better

	if (!phys_addr_valid(phys_addr)) {
		printk(KERN_WARNING "ioremap: invalid physical address %llx\n",
		       phys_addr);
		WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
		return NULL;
	}

in there. What needs fixing is that this returns 1 on 32-bits
unconditionally, whereas the x86-64 definition should also be used for
PAE (and the parameter type should also be resource_size_t).

Jan

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