linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: fix virt_addr_valid() with CONFIG_DEBUG

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

Date:	Wed, 1 Oct 2008 18:52:46 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
Cc:	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>,
	Vegard Nossum <vegardno@....uio.no>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: fix virt_addr_valid() with CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL=y

> But it seems that the current virt_addr_valid() doesn't take this into
> account. Should virt_addr_valid() be modified (on both x86_32 and
> x86_64) to take into account the same checks as __phys_addr() does
> when DEBUG_VIRTUAL=y? Or is it enough to use pfn_valid()?

At least in Linus' tree virt_addr_valid() is just a wrapper
around pfn_valid()


-Andi
--
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/