[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201001202003.13353.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:03:12 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: monstr@...str.eu
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
michal.simek@...alogix.com, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: Generic DMA - BUG_ON
On Wednesday 20 January 2010, Michal Simek wrote:
> Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:53:50AM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> >> and ops is NULL, then this code will oops; you will get a full register
> >> dump and backtrace. You can use this information along with markup_oops.pl
> >> to find out where the problem is.
> >
> > You can't rely on the oops if the code runs in process context. The
> > process may have address 0 mapped which would result in a security hole.
> > We had two of these bugs last year.
>
> That's the same problem which I had some days ago and Microblaze misses
> valuable backtrace (because we don't have FP or constant frame size).
You can do what x86 does and just print anything in the stack that looks
like part of a kernel function.
> > But I don't see any point in checking for dma_ops != NULL too. Any
> > developer would mention such a bug long before init is started.
>
> I agree that checking adds extra cycles to every dma-api call.
>
> I like as wrote Russel to check if ops exists or not.
If you are worried about the overhead, you could just add the BUG_ON
to the map calls but not to unmap and sync, which are rather unlikely
(and incorrect) to be called before a map.
Arnd
--
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