[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160224161944.GJ4777@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 16:19:44 +0000
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: miles.chen@...iatek.com
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, srv_wsdupstream@...iatek.com,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/mm: fix virtual address boundary check
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:01:48AM +0800, miles.chen@...iatek.com wrote:
> From: Miles Chen <miles.chen@...iatek.com>
>
> The MODULES_VADDR is not the lowest possible
> kernel virtual address. TASK_SIZE_64 may be larger than
> MODULES_VADDR, FIXADDR_TOP, and PCI_IO_START.
>
> Fix this by comparing TASK_SIZE_64 (highest user virtual address)
> with VA_START (lowest kernel virtual address).
>
> #define VA_BITS (CONFIG_ARM64_VA_BITS)
> #define VA_START (UL(0xffffffffffffffff) << VA_BITS)
> #define PAGE_OFFSET (UL(0xffffffffffffffff) << (VA_BITS - 1))
> #define MODULES_END (PAGE_OFFSET)
> #define MODULES_VADDR (MODULES_END - SZ_64M)
> #define PCI_IO_END (MODULES_VADDR - SZ_2M)
> #define PCI_IO_START (PCI_IO_END - PCI_IO_SIZE)
> #define FIXADDR_TOP (PCI_IO_START - SZ_2M)
> #define TASK_SIZE_64 (UL(1) << VA_BITS)
We should remove these checks altogether. There is a huge gap between
the user and kernel addresses that they would never overlap (we don't
have enough levels of page tables to cover 64-bit VA space).
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists