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  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:	Fri, 4 Apr 2008 16:58:38 -0700
From:	David Brownell <>
To:	Josh Boyer <>
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Michael Trimarchi <>,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH]  jffs2 summary allocation

On Friday 04 April 2008, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >   ... This means specifically that you may _not_ use the
> >   memory/addresses returned from vmalloc() for DMA.  ...
> > 
> > So I'm rather surprised to see *ANY* kernel code trying to do
> > that.  That rule has been in effect for many, many years now.
> I don't think it was intentional.  You're going through several layers
> here:
> JFFS2 -> mtd parts -> mtd dataflash -> atmel_spi.
> Typically MTD drivers aren't doing DMAs to flash and JFFS2 has no idea
> which particular chip driver is being used because it's abstracted by
> MTD.

That's true ... although I can imagine using DMA to
avoid dcache trashing if its setup cost is low enough,
with either NAND or NOR chips.

Still:  in this context vmalloc() is wrong.

- Dave
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists