linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] drivers: pci: fix pci_mmap

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Thu, 13 Nov 2014 11:32:34 +0000
From:	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
To:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>,
	Martin Wilck <martin.wilck@...fujitsu.com>,
	Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] drivers: pci: fix pci_mmap_fits()
 implementation for procfs mmap

On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 05:19:31PM +0000, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:

[...]

> > I read your comment as an agreement on the approach I took in my patch,
> > except for the current pci_resource_to_user() implementation(s), which I did
> > not touch.
> 
> Yes.  I have two things I'd like to clear up:
> 
>   1) Your patch changes behavior on platforms that implement their own
> pci_resource_to_user().  So I'd like to mention the details of that in
> the changelog, e.g., "procfs mmap on arches X, Y, Z has been broken
> since commit C, and this change fixes them."  ARM doesn't implement
> pci_resource_to_user(), so I don't think ARM is one of those arches.
> But I'd really like to include specifics on what those arches are, and
> what we think is currently broken, so their maintainers at least get a
> heads-up and can look for that  breakage.

I posted a v3, where I *tried* to bisect the commits that actually broke
the procfs interface and I added a commit log to explain why, it is very
hard to bisect a specific commit (given the dependency on the arch code)
and I do not have HW to test the fix on apart from ARM machines so there
is not much I can do on that side.

Please let me know what you think, thanks for having a look.

Lorenzo
--
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/