linux-kernel - Re: fix aperture vs. suspend problem

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

Message-ID: <20080313223845.GC8115@elf.ucw.cz>
Date:	Thu, 13 Mar 2008 23:38:45 +0100
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	ak@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
	rjw@...k.pl, len.brown@...el.com, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: fix aperture vs. suspend problem

On Thu 2008-03-13 15:32:48, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:05:31 +0100
> Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > aperture_64.c takes a piece of memory and makes it into iommu
> > window... but such window may not be saved by swsusp -- that leads to
> > oops during suspend.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c
> > index 608152a..88747f3 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c
> > @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ #include <linux/pci_ids.h>
> >  #include <linux/pci.h>
> >  #include <linux/bitops.h>
> >  #include <linux/ioport.h>
> > +#include <linux/suspend.h>
> >  #include <asm/e820.h>
> >  #include <asm/io.h>
> >  #include <asm/gart.h>
> > @@ -76,6 +77,7 @@ static u32 __init allocate_aperture(void
> >  	printk(KERN_INFO "Mapping aperture over %d KB of RAM @ %lx\n",
> >  			aper_size >> 10, __pa(p));
> >  	insert_aperture_resource((u32)__pa(p), aper_size);
> > +	register_nosave_region((u32)__pa(p) >> PAGE_SHIFT, (u32)__pa(p+aper_size) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> >  
> >  	return (u32)__pa(p);
> >  }
> > 
> 
> This is also needed in 2.6.24, perhaps earlier?

It seems to only trigger on >3GB boxes, during swsusp. People are not
normally suspending those big boxes. I do not think this is worth
backporting.

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
pomozte zachranit klanovicky les:  http://www.ujezdskystrom.info/
--
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/