linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] drivers/dax: Changing RC value

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:   Tue, 11 Apr 2017 13:58:20 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Pushkar Jambhlekar <pushkar.iit@...il.com>
Cc:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>,
        Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drivers/dax: Changing RC value

On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 10:56:45 +0530 Pushkar Jambhlekar <pushkar.iit@...il.com> wrote:

> Changing rc value from VM_FAULT_FALLBACK to VM_FAULT_SIGBUS for an unknown / unsupported fault size.
> 
> ...
>
> --- a/drivers/dax/dax.c
> +++ b/drivers/dax/dax.c
> @@ -590,7 +590,7 @@ static int dax_dev_huge_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf,
>  		rc = __dax_dev_pud_fault(dax_dev, vmf);
>  		break;
>  	default:
> -		rc =  VM_FAULT_FALLBACK;
> +		rc = VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
>  	}
>  	rcu_read_unlock();

The change seems to make sense but more info would be helpful.  What
is wrong with the current code?  ie, what goes wrong if we return
VM_FAULT_FALLBACK here?