linux-kernel - ioremap_xxx() with EXEC enabled

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

Date:	Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:32:10 +0800
From:	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: ioremap_xxx() with EXEC enabled

Hi,

On i386, EFI may need to map EFI runtime code area as EXEC enabled with
ioremap(). But, I found that the memory are mapped as EXEC disabled when
mapped with ioremap() now. I think we may need a method to map memory
area as EXEC enabled with ioremap_xxx(). Some possible interface schemes
for mapping as EXEC enabled are as follow:

- Interface scheme 1:

ioremap_cache_exec()
ioremap_uncache_exec()

- Interface scheme 2:

enum ioremap_mode {
	IOR_MODE_UNCACHED,
	IOR_MODE_CACHED,
};

enum ioremap_xmode {
	IOR_XMODE_UNEXEC,
	IOR_XMODE_EXEC,
};

void __iomem *__ioremap(unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size,
			enum ioremap_mode mode,
			enum ioremap_xmode xmode);

Which one do you think is better? Or we should use some other interface
or method?

Best Regards,
Huang Ying

--
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/