linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] uio: Support 36-bit physical addresses on 32-bit 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]

Message-ID: <CAOZdJXVLhe3aNM669sRFmDpHGCVRrP_93xdDwsY9R2VzHUZ-eQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:10:59 +0000
From:	Tabi Timur-B04825 <B04825@...escale.com>
To:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
CC:	Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>,
	"Hans J. Koch" <hjk@...sjkoch.de>,
	"gregkh@...e.de" <gregkh@...e.de>,
	"linuxppc-dev@...abs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jiang Kai-B18973 <B18973@...escale.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uio: Support 36-bit physical addresses on 32-bit systems

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
>> Do we believe phys_addr_t is always greater than or equal to size need for logical & virtual addresses?
>
> Yes:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT
> typedef u64 phys_addr_t;
> #else
> typedef u32 phys_addr_t;
> #endif

This isn't really an answer to the question.  This just says that
phys_addr_t can be 64-bit.  I don't see anywhere in the kernel that we
*enforce* or *require* that sizeof(phys_addr_t) >= sizeof(void *).

-- 
Timur Tabi
Linux kernel developer at Freescale
--
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/