| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20100614091823.34fac7a6.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 09:18:23 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> Cc: Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@...fujitsu.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86: ioremap: fix physical address check On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:43:27 -0700 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> wrote: > On 06/11/2010 02:20 AM, Kenji Kaneshige wrote: > > If the physical address is too high to be handled by ioremap() in > > x86_32 PAE (e.g. more than 36-bit physical address), ioremap() must > > return error (NULL). However, current x86 ioremap try to map this too > > high physical address, and it causes unexpected behavior. > > What unexpected behavior? It is perfectly legitimately to map such a > high address in PAE mode. We have a 36-bit kernel-imposed limit on > *RAM* in 32-bit mode (because we can't manage more than that), but there > is no reason it should apply to I/O. > I'm sorry for lack of study. How to access it via mapped area by ioremap() ? Thanks, -Kame -- 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