linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] arm64: Cleanup ioremap() and support ioremap

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 28 Apr 2022 08:48:09 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc:     Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] arm64: Cleanup ioremap() and support ioremap_prot()

On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 11:46:12AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> That's not a massively compelling diffstat for a cleanup, in all honesty.
> I looked at generic_access_phys() to try to figure out why we would want
> that on arm64, but it seems like it's related to mmap() of devices in
> userspace. Bearing in mind that CONFIG_STRICT_DEVMEM=y by default, please
> can you justify why this is something worth doing?

While I don't care much about ioremap_prot I'd really love to eventually
convert everyone to the common ioremap code as there really is no
point in duplicating it in the architectures.