linux-kernel - Re: ce56a86e2a ("x86/mm: Limit mmap() of /dev/mem to valid physical addresses"): kernel BUG at arch/x86/mm/physaddr.c:79!

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 27 Oct 2017 21:24:17 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Craig Bergstrom <craigb@...gle.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Sander Eikelenboom <linux@...elenboom.it>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>, wfg@...ux.intel.com,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKP <lkp@...org>
Subject: Re: ce56a86e2a ("x86/mm: Limit mmap() of /dev/mem to valid physical
 addresses"): kernel BUG at arch/x86/mm/physaddr.c:79!

* Craig Bergstrom <craigb@...gle.com> wrote:

> Reverting seems like the right approach at the moment.  My apologies
> for the breakage so late the in the cycle.

Note that there's no need for you to apologize and you carry exactly zero amount 
of blame for the late-cycle breakage: it was my decision to send it to Linus so 
quickly, you never asked for it to be sent upstream on such a short notice.

( Classic "patch makes sense, looks good, other arches ar doing this too, and I 
  tested it myself too on multiple systems, so it must be obviously fine for 
  everyone" moment. )

Your change still makes sense from a robustness POV, so please send it again with 
the suggested fixes - and I'll be more careful with the upstream merge this time.

Thanks,

	Ingo