linux-kernel - Re: [PULL] Add support for Texas Instruments C6X architecture

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]

Date:	Fri, 4 Nov 2011 18:23:10 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PULL] Add support for Texas Instruments C6X architecture

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Please pull this port of Linux to the Texas Instruments C6X architecture.
> The patches have all been acked and available for some time in linux-net.

Ugh. So I finally was about to merge this, but wanted to check the
non-C6x files before I did.

And that seems broken. If I read that code correctly, your
ARCH_PFN_OFFSET thing is just insane, and thinking that "pfn_valid()"
has anything to do with PAGE_OFFSET is crazy.

PAGE_OFFSET is about *virtual* addresses. It has absolutely nothing to
do with pfn's that are the physical page number. virt_to_pfn() already
corrects for PAGE_OFFSET (that part of your patch looks fine), your
change to *also* do it in pfn_valid() looks entirely bogus to me.

I'm not pulling new architectures that look like they will break old
ones, and do odd things to generic files.

                       Linus
--
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/