Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1274413
| From | Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] restrict /dev/mem to idle io memory ranges |
| Date | 2015-11-20 21:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qx0N4-3MB-29@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qwXPc-1Rb-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <qx0k1-3Cd-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <qx0tH-3FK-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux > <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 09:31:33AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: >>> This effectively promotes IORESOURCE_BUSY to IORESOURCE_EXCLUSIVE >>> semantics by default. If userspace really believes it is safe to access >>> the memory region it can also perform the extra step of disabling an >>> active driver. This protects device address ranges with read side >>> effects and otherwise directs userspace to use the driver. >> >> I'm happy with this as long as we retain the option to disable this >> new behaviour. >> >> The reason being, when developing a driver, it is _very_ useful to >> be able to poke around in the device's (and system memory) address >> spaces with tools like devmem2 to work out what's going on when >> things go wrong. >> >> To put it another way, I think it's a good idea to disable access to >> these regions on production systems, but for driver development, we >> want to retain the ability to poke around in physical address space >> in any way we so desire. >> > > Sounds ok to me, but I do think it's a good idea to default it to the > same value as STRICT_DEVMEM. Perhaps: > > bool "Filter I/O access to /dev/mem" if EXPERT > default STRICT_DEVMEM > > When this in do we even need IORESOURCE_EXCLUSIVE? It's barely used. Let's leave it for now to give us the debugging granularity Russell mentioned. If it turns out it's never used, we can drop it in the future. -Kees -- Kees Cook Chrome OS Security -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC PATCH] restrict /dev/mem to idle io memory ranges Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2015-11-20 18:40 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] restrict /dev/mem to idle io memory ranges Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2015-11-20 21:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] restrict /dev/mem to idle io memory ranges Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2015-11-20 21:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] restrict /dev/mem to idle io memory ranges Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> - 2015-11-20 21:20 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] restrict /dev/mem to idle io memory ranges Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2015-11-20 21:30 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] restrict /dev/mem to idle io memory ranges Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2015-11-20 21:50 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] restrict /dev/mem to idle io memory ranges Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2015-11-23 10:40 +0100
csiph-web