[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100121175317.GA14752@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:53:17 +0000
From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
To: "Steven J. Magnani" <steve@...idescorp.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>, monstr@...str.eu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, michal.simek@...alogix.com,
arnd@...db.de, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: Generic DMA - BUG_ON
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 09:51:37AM -0600, Steven J. Magnani wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-01-20 at 12:00 +0100, 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.
>
> You also can't rely on an oops in a NOMMU environment.
I don't see why implementations where NULL pointer derefs should be
penalized by having additional NULL checks.
Maybe this needs to be a conditional check which can be optimized away
on architectures where NULL dereference always produces an oops.
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of:
--
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