linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: dma: fix dma_max

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: <c29290ee-9d74-73f9-7405-112357359f55@ti.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:38:24 +0300
From:   Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>
To:     Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
CC:     <ssantosh@...nel.org>, <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: dma: fix dma_max_pfn()

Hi Santosh & Russell,

On 19/08/16 19:38, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> 
> On 8/19/2016 12:30 AM, Roger Quadros wrote:
>> Hi Santosh,
>>
> 
>>>> So I'm 99.9% convinced that the proposed change is correct.
>>>>
>>> I will got with that then :-) and take my objection back. Just
>>> saying that if there other breakages which I can't recollect now,
>>> those drivers needs to be patched as well.
>>>
>> I was able to boot the Keystone2 Edison EVM over NFS with the $subject patch.
>> Boot log is below. Do you see anything suspicious?
>>
> Logs looks ok to me. Probably do some tests where DMA and bounce buffers etc gets tested. Running it through your internal regression
> suit will be good idea as well if thats possible.
> 

This has been running in our internal test suite for a week on various TI
platforms. There haven't been any surprises.

Is it a good idea to at least put this in -next for a wider test audience?

cheers,
-roger