linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix kunmap() argument in sg_miter

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: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811171015070.3468@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:16:34 -0800 (PST)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
cc:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix kunmap() argument in sg_miter_stop



On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
> 
> Any opinions on the kunmap/kunmap_atomic pointer checking? It's a bit
> ugly that we have to enforce a void * rule for kunmap_atomic(),

I don't think that's a "bit ugly". I think it's unacceptable.

Making sure we pass in "struct page" to kunmap() sounds good, but the 
kunmap_atomic() part just sounds insane.

		Linus
--
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/