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  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]
Date:   Wed, 8 Aug 2018 15:50:17 +0100
From:   Catalin Marinas <>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc:     'Mikulas Patocka' <>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <>,
        Joao Pinto <>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <>,
        Will Deacon <>,
        Russell King <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
        Matt Sealey <>,
        linux-pci <>,
        Jingoo Han <>,
        linux-arm-kernel <>
Subject: Re: framebuffer corruption due to overlapping stp instructions on

On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 02:26:11PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Mikulas Patocka
> > Sent: 08 August 2018 14:47
> ...
> > The problem on ARM is that I see data corruption when the overlapping
> > unaligned writes are done just by a single core.
> Is this a sequence of unaligned writes (that shouldn't modify the
> same physical locations) or an aligned write followed by an
> unaligned one that updates part of the earlier write.
> (Or the opposite order?)

In the memcpy() case, there can be a sequence of unaligned writes but
they would not modify the same byte (so no overlapping address at the
byte level).


Powered by blists - more mailing lists