[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080116073322.GE30950@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:33:22 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com
Cc: ak@....de, ebiederm@...ssion.com, rdreier@...co.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, gregkh@...e.de, airlied@...net.ie,
davej@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arjan@...radead.org,
jesse.barnes@...el.com, davem@...emloft.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 4/4] x86: PAT followup - use ioremap for devmem read of
reserved regions
* venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com> wrote:
> --- linux-2.6.git.orig/drivers/char/mem.c 2008-01-15 10:05:13.000000000 -0800
> +++ linux-2.6.git/drivers/char/mem.c 2008-01-15 10:05:51.000000000 -0800
> @@ -127,9 +127,14 @@
> * by the kernel or data corruption may occur
> */
> ptr = xlate_dev_mem_ptr(p);
> + if (!ptr)
> + return -EFAULT;
>
> if (copy_to_user(buf, ptr, sz))
> return -EFAULT;
> +
> + unxlate_dev_mem_ptr(p, ptr);
sidenote: drivers/char/mem.c has no locking here, are you sure it's safe
to create a possibly large number of aliases here? At least on 32-bit it
could deplete the vmalloc area. (where all ioremaps go)
since /dev/mem access is strongly discouraged anyway (except perhaps for
debugging purposes), wouldnt it be safer to stick a mutex around these
areas?
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists