linux-kernel - Re: Adding kmap_atomic_prot_pfn (was: [git pull] drm patches for 2.6.27-rc1)

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

Message-Id: <1224826660.22877.83.camel@koto.keithp.com>
Date:	Thu, 23 Oct 2008 22:37:40 -0700
From:	Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>
To:	benh@...nel.crashing.org
Cc:	keithp@...thp.com, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au,
	airlied@...ux.ie,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, dri-devel@...ts.sf.net,
	yinghai@...nel.org, Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: Adding kmap_atomic_prot_pfn  (was: [git pull] drm patches for
	2.6.27-rc1)

On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 14:24 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

> I'm not that fan of carrying a mapping with a struct resource because if
> we do that we should probably also refcount the mapping, and then there
> is the whole question of mappings with different attributes, etc etc...

I'm fine with sticking the mapping in a separate structure; it's just
the return from ioremap_wc on 64-bit systems, and nothing at all on
32-bit systems. I don't really see the advantage of moving it into the
resource, especially as we may need different access modes (UC vs WC)
for different portions of a single BAR.

We may want to add some bounds and access mode information to this
structure to check for broken drivers.

-- 
keith.packard@...el.com

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)