Re: Access to non-RAM pages

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 10:48 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Sat, 2018-09-01 at 11:06 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > [ Adding a few new people the the cc.
> > 
> >   The issue is the worry about software-speculative accesses (ie
> > things like CONFIG_DCACHE_WORD_ACCESS - not talking about the hw
> > speculation now) accessing past RAM into possibly contiguous IO ]
> > 
> > On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 10:27 AM Linus Torvalds
> > <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > 
> > > If you have a machine with RAM that touches IO, you need to disable
> > > the last page, exactly the same way we disable and marked reserved the
> > > first page at zero.
> 
> So I missed the departure of that train ... stupid question, with
> CONFIG_DCACHE_WORD_ACCESS, if that can be unaligned (I assume it can),
> what prevents it from crossing into a non-mapped page (not even IO) and
> causing an oops ? Looking at a random user in fs/dcache.c its not a
> uaccess-style read with recovery.... Or am I missing somethign obvious
> here ?

Also, if we cross page boundaries with those guys then we have a bigger
problem no ? we could fall off a vmalloc page into the nether or into
an ioremap mapping no ?

Cheers,
Ben.