linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] RISC-V: Implement sparsemem

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: <alpine.DEB.2.21.9999.1908141035020.18249@viisi.sifive.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:40:35 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>
To:     Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com>
cc:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Andrew Waterman <andrew@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, greentime.hu@...ive.com,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        Michael Clark <michaeljclark@....com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, linux-mm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] RISC-V: Implement sparsemem

On Wed, 14 Aug 2019, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:

> On 2019-08-14 7:35 a.m., Greentime Hu wrote:
>
> > Maybe this commit explains why it used HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID instead of SPARSEMEM.
> > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/7b7bf499f79de3f6c85a340c8453a78789523f85
> > 
> > BTW, I found another issue here.
> > #define FIXADDR_TOP            (VMALLOC_START)
> > #define FIXADDR_START           (FIXADDR_TOP - FIXADDR_SIZE)
> > #define VMEMMAP_END    (VMALLOC_START - 1)
> > #define VMEMMAP_START  (VMALLOC_START - VMEMMAP_SIZE)
> > These 2 regions are overlapped.
> > 
> > How about this fix? Not sure if it is good for everyone.
> 
> Yes, this looks good to me. I can fold these changes into my patch and
> send a v5 to the list.

The change to FIXADDR_TOP should be separated out into its own patch - it 
probably needs to go up as a fix.


- Paul