linux-kernel - Re: n900 in next-20170901

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: <20171115024801.GA21621@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
Date:   Wed, 15 Nov 2017 11:48:01 +0900
From:   Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
To:     Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, pali.rohar@...il.com, sre@...nel.org,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, khilman@...nel.org,
        aaro.koskinen@....fi, ivo.g.dimitrov.75@...il.com,
        patrikbachan@...il.com, serge@...lyn.com, abcloriens@...il.com,
        "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>
Subject: Re: n900 in next-20170901

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 06:04:00PM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com> [171115 00:48]:
> > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 09:37:19AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > * Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com> [171114 06:34]:
> > > > On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 07:36:20AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > > > * Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com> [171110 06:34]:
> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 07:26:10PM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > > > > > +#define OMAP34XX_SRAM_PHYS	0x40200000
> > > > > > > +#define OMAP34XX_SRAM_VIRT	0xd0010000
> > > > > > > +#define OMAP34XX_SRAM_SIZE	0x10000
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > For my testing environment, vmalloc address space is started at
> > > > > > roughly 0xe0000000 so 0xd0010000 would not be valid.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Well we can map it anywhere we want, got any preferences?
> > > > 
> > > > My testing environment is a beagle-(xm?) for QEMU. It is configured by
> > > > CONFIG_VMSPLIT_3G=y so kernel address space is started at 0xc0000000.
> > > > And, it has 512 MB memory so 0xc0000000 ~ 0xdff00000 is used for
> > > > direct mapping. See below.
> > > > 
> > > > [    0.000000] Memory: 429504K/522240K available (11264K kernel code,
> > > > 1562K rwdata, 4288K rodata, 2048K init, 405K bss, 27200K reserved,
> > > > 65536K cma-reserved, 0K highmem)
> > > > [    0.000000] Virtual kernel memory layout:
> > > > [    0.000000]     vector  : 0xffff0000 - 0xffff1000   (   4 kB)
> > > > [    0.000000]     fixmap  : 0xffc00000 - 0xfff00000   (3072 kB)
> > > > [    0.000000]     vmalloc : 0xe0000000 - 0xff800000   ( 504 MB)
> > > > [    0.000000]     lowmem  : 0xc0000000 - 0xdff00000   ( 511 MB)
> > > > [    0.000000]     pkmap   : 0xbfe00000 - 0xc0000000   (   2 MB)
> > > > [    0.000000]     modules : 0xbf000000 - 0xbfe00000   (  14 MB)
> > > > [    0.000000]       .text : 0xc0208000 - 0xc0e00000   (12256 kB)
> > > > [    0.000000]       .init : 0xc1300000 - 0xc1500000   (2048 kB)
> > > > [    0.000000]       .data : 0xc1500000 - 0xc1686810   (1563 kB)
> > > > [    0.000000]        .bss : 0xc168fc68 - 0xc16f512c   ( 406 kB)
> > > > 
> > > > Therefore, if OMAP34XX_SRAM_VIRT is 0xd0010000, direct mapping is
> > > > broken and the system doesn't work. I guess that we should use more
> > > > stable address like as 0xf0000000.
> > > 
> > > OK. Let's forget about adding static mappings and my earlier
> > > patches to attempt to fix this. Below is what I now think we should
> > > merge as a fix before merging Joonsoo's patches. Please all review
> > > and test, adding Tero to Cc also.
> > 
> > Okay. Then, this patch will be merged by yourself as a fix? I'm okay
> > with either way. Just let me know. :)
> 
> Well what's the plan with your patches? I'd not have mainline
> kernel broken so if this was the only blocker for the v4.15,
> then you should pick it.
> 
> However, if your patches are now planned for v4.16, then I'll
> queue it for early v4.15-rc.

It was the only blocker but I think that it's too late for v4.15. I
will try again for v4.16. Please queue your fix for early v4.15-rc.

Thanks.