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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <488385A7.4010509@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date:	Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:36:23 +0200
From:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To:	linuxppc-dev@...abs.org
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: dma_alloc_coherent() on PPC32: physical addresses above 2G possible?

Hi all,

I have to implement a workaround for a PCI device which gets into 
trouble if descriptors are located at 32bit addresses, while 31bit 
addresses are fine.  I would like to avoid this workaround on machines 
on which dma_alloc_coherent() won't ever go at memory above 2 GB.

Is defined(CONFIG_PPC32) a safe test for this?  I'm under the impression 
that defined(CONFIG_X86_32) is safe.

Are there any other means to detect when the workaround can be omitted, 
at compile time or at runtime?

PS:  I don't want to set the DMA mask of this device to DMA_31BIT_MASK 
because that would be detrimental to other functions of the device. It's 
a TI TSB43AB22A FireWire controller.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- -=== =-=--
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ