Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 05 Oct 2008 08:05:09 -0700 | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 02/12] On Tue, 23 Sep 2008, David Miller wrote: |
| |
Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Sat, 4 Oct 2008, Jesse Brandeburg wrote: >>> Exactly. The access to a ro region results in a fault. I have nowhere >>> seen that trigger, but I can reproduce the trylock() WARN_ON, which >>> confirms that there is concurrent access to the NVRAM registers. The >>> backtrace pattern is similar to the one you have seen. >> are you still getting WARN_ON *with* all the mutex based fixes already applied? > > The WARN_ON triggers with current mainline. Is there any fixlet in > Linus tree missing ? > >> with the mutex patches in place (without protection patch) we are >> still reproducing the issue, until we apply the set_memory_ro patch. > > That does not make sense to me. If the memory_ro patch is providing > _real_ protection then you _must_ run into an access violation. If not, > then the patch just papers over the real problem in some mysterious > way. >
not if the bad code is doing copy_to_user .... (or similar)
| |