From: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
arnd@arndb.de, hannes@cmpxchg.org, kirill@shutemov.name,
mgorman@techsingularity.net, hughd@google.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [RESENT PATCH] x86/mem: fix the offset overflow when read/write mem
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 10:14:53 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5912779D.3020908@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1494344803.20270.27.camel@redhat.com>
On 2017/5/9 23:46, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 10:28 +0800, zhong jiang wrote:
>> On 2017/5/4 2:46, Rik van Riel wrote:
>>> However, it is not as easy as simply checking the
>>> end against __pa(high_memory). Some systems have
>>> non-contiguous physical memory ranges, with gaps
>>> of invalid addresses in-between.
>> The invalid physical address means that it is used as
>> io mapped. not in system ram region. /dev/mem is not
>> access to them , is it right?
> Not necessarily. Some systems simply have large
> gaps in physical memory access. Their memory map
> may look like this:
>
> |MMMMMM|IO|MMMM|..................|MMMMMMMM|
>
> Where M is memory, IO is IO space, and the
> dots are simply a gap in physical address
> space with no valid accesses at all.
>
>>> At that point, is the complexity so much that it no
>>> longer makes sense to try to protect against root
>>> crashing the system?
>>>
>> your suggestion is to let the issue along without any protection.
>> just root user know what they are doing.
> Well, root already has other ways to crash the system.
>
> Implementing validation on /dev/mem may make sense if
> it can be done in a simple way, but may not be worth
> it if it becomes too complex.
>
I have no a simple way to fix. Do you any suggestion. or you can send
a patch for me ?
Thanks
zhongjiang
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <arnd@arndb.de>,
<hannes@cmpxchg.org>, <kirill@shutemov.name>,
<mgorman@techsingularity.net>, <hughd@google.com>,
<linux-mm@kvack.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [RESENT PATCH] x86/mem: fix the offset overflow when read/write mem
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 10:14:53 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5912779D.3020908@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1494344803.20270.27.camel@redhat.com>
On 2017/5/9 23:46, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 10:28 +0800, zhong jiang wrote:
>> On 2017/5/4 2:46, Rik van Riel wrote:
>>> However, it is not as easy as simply checking the
>>> end against __pa(high_memory). Some systems have
>>> non-contiguous physical memory ranges, with gaps
>>> of invalid addresses in-between.
>> The invalid physical address means that it is used as
>> io mapped. not in system ram region. /dev/mem is not
>> access to them , is it right?
> Not necessarily. Some systems simply have large
> gaps in physical memory access. Their memory map
> may look like this:
>
> |MMMMMM|IO|MMMM|..................|MMMMMMMM|
>
> Where M is memory, IO is IO space, and the
> dots are simply a gap in physical address
> space with no valid accesses at all.
>
>>> At that point, is the complexity so much that it no
>>> longer makes sense to try to protect against root
>>> crashing the system?
>>>
>> your suggestion is to let the issue along without any protection.
>> just root user know what they are doing.
> Well, root already has other ways to crash the system.
>
> Implementing validation on /dev/mem may make sense if
> it can be done in a simple way, but may not be worth
> it if it becomes too complex.
>
I have no a simple way to fix. Do you any suggestion. or you can send
a patch for me ?
Thanks
zhongjiang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-10 2:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-27 11:49 [RESENT PATCH] x86/mem: fix the offset overflow when read/write mem zhongjiang
2017-04-27 11:49 ` zhongjiang
2017-05-02 1:47 ` zhong jiang
2017-05-02 1:47 ` zhong jiang
2017-05-02 20:54 ` David Rientjes
2017-05-02 20:54 ` David Rientjes
2017-05-03 6:42 ` zhong jiang
2017-05-03 6:42 ` zhong jiang
2017-05-03 18:46 ` Rik van Riel
2017-05-04 2:28 ` zhong jiang
2017-05-04 2:28 ` zhong jiang
2017-05-09 15:46 ` Rik van Riel
2017-05-10 2:14 ` zhong jiang [this message]
2017-05-10 2:14 ` zhong jiang
2017-05-10 2:15 ` Xishi Qiu
2017-05-10 2:15 ` Xishi Qiu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5912779D.3020908@huawei.com \
--to=zhongjiang@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=qiuxishi@huawei.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.