linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix Oops with Atmel SPI

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: <4BC6C0FE.1000701@call-direct.com.au>
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:32:14 +1000
From:	Iwo Mergler <iwo@...l-direct.com.au>
To:	Anders Larsen <al@...rsen.net>
CC:	Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@...ia.com>,
	Ian McDonnell <ian@...ghtstareng.com>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
	Matthias Kaehlcke <matthias@...hlcke.net>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix Oops with Atmel SPI

Hi Anders,

Anders Larsen wrote:
> Hi Iwo,
> 
> On 2010-04-14 09:30:41, Iwo Mergler wrote:
>> I wouldn't recommend that. MTD erase blocks are 64K or more. In a typical
>> embedded system you will not be able to kmalloc that much memory after
>> a few day's of operation - the page pool gets fragmented.
> 
> the original problem occurs with SPI flashes, which typically have a much
> smaller erase block size (and it only occurs when they are driven by an Atmel
> SoC SPI controller, hence the #ifdefs)
> 
>> A possibly better approach is to arrange for that memory to get allocated
>> at driver start time.
> 
> The buffer in question is indeed allocated _once_ (at the first write
> operation to the device) and only deallocated when the device is unmounted,
> so allocating it at driver load time wouldn't make much difference IMHO.
> 

I'm sorry, I thought you were somewhere else in the MTD source.
The bad block handling code for NAND also has a full erase block
allocation, which happens during runtime. 

You are correct in that the mount time allocation should be
safe, for most systems.

Best regards,

Iwo

--
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/