linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] x86/uapi for 3.8

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: <20121215210411.GA228@x4>
Date:	Sat, 15 Dec 2012 22:04:11 +0100
From:	Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86/uapi for 3.8

On 2012.12.15 at 11:58 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 11:41 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> >
> > Matt is on vacation, and I'm partly offline for the weekend, but that
> > definitely seems suspicious.  Do we have a memory map of the affected
> > machine(s)?
> 
> 
> but as mentioned, there's bound to be some particular kernel layout
> that triggers this, because I definitely ran a few kernels with that
> commit in it without problems (and clearly other people are too).
> Looking at my boot log, I had successful boots with both 6a57d104c8cb
> and c2714334b944, which contains that commit.
> 
> It might also be that it causes some massive corruption at boot time,
> but it then requires that that particular memory is actually used. So
> maybe it's not so much about the memory map except indirectly.
> 
> But that commit *does* look a lot more likely than the things I looked at.

The commit message says that only some broken implementations of EFI
firmware require the mapping for the physical I/O device addresses.

So I wonder if the following simple patch might be enough?
It fixes the issue for me at least.

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c b/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c
index e190f7b..402e4ca 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ int ioremap_change_attr(unsigned long vaddr, unsigned long size,
 	return err;
 }
 
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
+#ifdef CONFIG_EFI
 static void ident_pte_range(unsigned long paddr, unsigned long vaddr,
 			    pmd_t *ppmd, pmd_t *vpmd, unsigned long end)
 {

-- 
Markus
--
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/