[lkml]   [2003]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC] prevent "dd if=/dev/mem" crash
    David Mosberger <> wrote:
    > >>>>> On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 16:55:43 -0700, Andrew Morton <> said:
    > >> If we really believe copy_*_user() must correctly handle *all* faults,
    > >> isn't the "p >= __pa(high_memory)" test superfluous?
    > Andrew> This code was conceived before my time and I don't recall seeing much
    > Andrew> discussion, so this is all guesswork..
    > Andrew> I'd say that the high_memory test _is_ superfluous and that
    > Andrew> if anyone cared, we would remove it and establish a
    > Andrew> temporary pte against the address if it was outside the
    > Andrew> direct-mapped area. But nobody cares enough to have done
    > Andrew> anything about it.
    > What about memory-mapped device registers? Isn't all memory
    > physically contiguous on x86 and that's why the "p >=
    > __pa(high_memory)" test saves you from that?

    We _want_ to be able to read mmio ranges via /dev/mem, don't we? I guess
    it has never come up because everyone uses kmem.

    > >> On ia64, a read to non-existent physical memory causes the processor
    > >> to time out and take a machine check. I'm not sure it's even possible
    > >> to recover from that.
    > Andrew> ick. That would be very poor form.
    > Reasonable people can disagree on that.

    nah ;)

    > One philosophy states that if
    > your kernel touches random addresses, it's better to signal a visible
    > error (machine-check) than to risk silent data corruption.

    An access to an illegal address should generate a fault, period. This puts
    the processing into the hands of software. If software chooses to silently
    ignore the fault (ie: "silent data corruption") then it is poorly designed.

    If the hardware doesn't give the system programmer a choice then the
    hardware is poorly designed, surely?

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:0.023 / U:19.480 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site