linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: allow, but warn, when issuing ioremap() on RAM

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: <20101008232539.GA28697@kroah.com>
Date:	Fri, 8 Oct 2010 16:25:39 -0700
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...il.com>,
	linux-main <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Arnd Hannemann <arnd@...dnet.de>,
	Han Jonghun <jonghun79.han@...il.com>,
	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, Hemant Pedanekar <hemantp@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: allow, but warn, when issuing ioremap() on RAM

On Sat, Oct 09, 2010 at 12:04:51AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 10:37:10PM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > People have been discussing them, but you can't expect a perfect
> > solution to pop up within one release cycle, specially when people
> > have real issues to deal with.
> 
> Two release cycles.  It was queued for the previous release, was posted
> to the mailing list, was de-queued, and then re-added for the last merge
> window.
> 
> That's not no warning - that's almost six months.
> 
> http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100408.094818.d6854bd5.en.html
> 
> So what you're telling me is that in six months, not one driver has been
> touched to address this issue?  So, if no one in that time has done any
> work on this, then what use is it going to be making the kernel issue
> a warning instead?
> 
> So, since this has been known about for six months to the day, I completely
> fail to see how making this a warning instead will create the necessary
> motivation for the issue to be addressed.

I doubt that people even noticed that this was a problem.

Unless you throw a run-time warning at them, or even better, break the
build of their drivers, they will not notice.

Also, how can we fix this in a driver, what is the proper steps to do
so?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/