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  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:	Sun, 17 Jan 2010 09:40:43 -0800
From:	Arjan van de Ven <>
To:	Felix Rubinstein <>
Subject: Re: /dev/mem implementation

On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 18:47:10 +0200
Felix Rubinstein <> wrote:

> I see the motivation to limit the access to DRAM from root account
> CONFIG_STRICT_DEVMEM by mmap'ing /dev/[k]mem but it's easily overruled
> by simple char driver and implementing mmap of it's own totally
> bypassing all limitations.
> What do you think about it guy?
> Appreciate it.

the reason PAT bans parts of /dev/mem is simple: it is illegal to have
mapping aliases (different cachability) for the same physical page.
Normal kernel APIs take care of this for the normal case, but /dev/mem
would be a back door into that.
This is a hardware imposed requirement, and violating the rule can have
really nasty consequences... hence the PAT code just not allowing it.

If you feel that you have a valid use case where you really want do
muck with such memory, it might be a good idea to explain that

Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
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