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: <26594413-227b-2cc8-0f61-232a6a3907d0@deltatee.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Aug 2019 11:46:23 -0600
From:   Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
To:     Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.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>, linux-mm@...r.kernel.org,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, greentime.hu@...ive.com,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        Michael Clark <michaeljclark@....com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] RISC-V: Implement sparsemem



On 2019-08-14 11:40 a.m., Paul Walmsley wrote:
> 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.

I don't think so... VMEMMAP_START doesn't exist until the sparsemem
patch so it can't be changed until after the sparsemem patch and no
sense adding a bug in the sparsemem patch...

Logan