linux-kernel - Re: [Revert] Re: [PATCH] mm: sync vmalloc address space page tables in alloc_vm

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: <20110901141754.76cef93b.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 1 Sep 2011 14:17:54 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"namhyung@...il.com" <namhyung@...il.com>,
	"rientjes@...gle.com" <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	"paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Revert] Re: [PATCH] mm: sync vmalloc address space page tables
 in alloc_vm_area()

On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 13:37:46 -0700
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:

> On 09/01/2011 09:11 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 12:51:03PM +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> >> From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
> > Andrew,
> >
> > I was wondering if you would be Ok with this patch for 3.1.
> >
> > It is a revert (I can prepare a proper revert if you would like
> > that instead of this patch).

David's patch looks better than a straight reversion.

Problem is, I can't find David's original email anywhere.  Someone's
been playing games with To: headers?

> > The users of this particular function (alloc_vm_area) are just
> > Xen. There are no others.
> 
> I'd prefer to put explicit vmalloc_sync_all()s in the callsites where
> necessary,

What would that patch look like?  Bear in mind that we'll need something
suitable for 3.1 and for a 3.0 backport.

> and ultimately try to work out ways of avoiding it altogether
> (like have some hypercall wrapper which touches the arg memory to make
> sure its mapped?).

--
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/