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]
Date:	Tue, 24 Jul 2007 06:55:36 -0700
From:	"Dan Williams" <>
To:	"Jens Axboe" <>
Cc:	"Andrew Morton" <>,
	"Alexey Dobriyan" <>,
	"Linus Torvalds" <>,,,
Subject: Re: 2.6.23-rc1: BUG_ON in kmap_atomic_prot()

On 7/24/07, Jens Axboe <> wrote:
> What about the new async crypto stuff? I've been looking, but is it
> guarenteed that async_memcpy() runs in process context with interrupts
> enabled always? If not, there's a km type bug there.

Currently the only user is the MD raid456 driver, and yes, it only
performs copies from the handle_stripe routine which is always run in
process context with interrupts enabled.  However this is not
documented.  Would it be advisable to add a WARN_ON for this

> In general, I think the highmem stuff could do with more safety checks:
> - People ALWAYS get the atomic unmaps wrong, passing in the page instead
>   of the address. I've seen tons of these. And since kunmap_atomic()
>   takes a void pointer, nobody notices until it goes boom.
> - People easily get the km type wrong - they use KM_USERx in interrupt
>   context, or one of the irq variants without disabling interrupts.
> If we could just catch these two types of bugs, we've got a lot of these
> problems covered.
> --
> Jens Axboe
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists