linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] NOMMU: implement vmap/vunmap with kmalloc

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: <201003311554.38473.vapier@gentoo.org>
Date:	Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:54:36 -0400
From:	Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
To:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:	uclinux-dev@...inux.org, David McCullough <davidm@...pgear.com>,
	Greg Ungerer <gerg@...inux.org>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	uclinux-dist-devel@...ckfin.uclinux.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] NOMMU: implement vmap/vunmap with kmalloc

On Wednesday 31 March 2010 13:11:24 David Howells wrote:
> How about the attached patch instead?  I'd rather not make vmap() generally
> available in NOMMU mode since it can't be implemented in NOMMU mode.  Yes,
> vmap() can take a copy of the pages it is given, but you can't guarantee
> that's the right thing to do.  It's like a shared-writable mmap.
> 
> Instead, why not just override vmap() in firmware_class.c for the one
> instance where we know we're happy with this behaviour?

how about putting this implementation into like vmap_nommu() and only 
rewriting vmap() to vmap_nommu() when we know it's safe ?  such as this 
firmware case ?
-mike

Download attachment "signature.asc " of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)