linux-kernel - Re: USB transfer_buffer allocations on 64bit systems

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]

Date:	Thu, 8 Apr 2010 08:12:04 +0200
From:	Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	Daniel Mack <daniel@...aq.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Pedro Ribeiro <pedrib@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: USB transfer_buffer allocations on 64bit systems

Am Mittwoch, 7. April 2010 17:46:17 schrieb Alan Stern:
> Or alternatively, instead of allocating regular memory the routine
> could simply fail.  Then the caller would be responsible for checking
> and using regular memory instead of dma-consistent memory.  Of course,
> that would put an even larger burden on the caller than just forcing it
> to keep track of what flag to use.

Then it would be sensible to pass it a filled URB, modify it or return
an error code.

	Regards
		Oliver
--
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/