[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51A94ECC.5090303@codeaurora.org>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 18:30:52 -0700
From: Stepan Moskovchenko <stepanm@...eaurora.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>,
Bryan Huntsman <bryanh@...eaurora.org>,
Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: Prevent memory aliasing on non-LPAE kernels
On 5/30/2013 3:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> + if (size > ((phys_addr_t)~0))
>> + size = ((phys_addr_t)~0);
>> +
>> + /* arm_add_memory() already checks for the case of base + size > 4GB */
>> +#endif
>> arm_add_memory(base, size);
>> }
>
> This looks wrong for the case where 'base' is between >0 and 4GB and 'size'
> makes it spill over the 4GB boundary. You need to set
> 'size = (phys_addr_t)~0 - base' then.
>
Ah. I believe arm_add_memory() already has the logic to handle this
case. Here, we are just trying to shrink 'size' to fit into phys_addr_t,
since it is currently u64 but arm_add_memory() uses phys_addr_t for its
arguments. I did not want to have this logic in two places, but I can do
what you said if you like.
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists