On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 08:05:09PM -0700, Andrey Smirnov wrote: > On 64-bit SoCs it becomes possible to end up with a DMA buffer > allocated in the region of memory inaccessible to ESDHC > controller. Change the code to bail out if that happens to avoid > silent failures. > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/mci/imx-esdhc.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/mci/imx-esdhc.c b/drivers/mci/imx-esdhc.c > index db96a8139..f6451e204 100644 > --- a/drivers/mci/imx-esdhc.c > +++ b/drivers/mci/imx-esdhc.c > @@ -304,6 +304,9 @@ esdhc_send_cmd(struct mci_host *mci, struct mci_cmd *cmd, struct mci_data *data) > dma = dma_map_single(host->dev, ptr, num_bytes, dir); > if (dma_mapping_error(host->dev, dma)) > return -EIO; > + > + if (dma > U32_MAX) > + return -EFAULT; > } If struct device_d had a dma_mask member, it could be initialized by the esdhc driver probe function and dma_map_single() would already fail on addresses > 32bit without additional checks. That's what Linux does and I think we should do the same. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
