linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2/3] only allow nonlinear vmas for ram backed filesystems

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070325155127.GR10459@waste.org>
Date:	Sun, 25 Mar 2007 10:51:27 -0500
From:	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] only allow nonlinear vmas for ram backed filesystems

On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 02:12:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-03-24 at 23:09 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...e.cz>
> > 
> > Dirty page accounting/limiting doesn't work for nonlinear mappings, so
> > for non-ram backed filesystems emulate with linear mappings.  This
> > retains ABI compatibility with previous kernels at minimal code cost.
> > 
> > All known users of nonlinear mappings actually use tmpfs, so this
> > shouldn't have any negative effect.

They do? I thought the whole point of nonlinear mappings was for
mapping files bigger than the address space (eg. databases). Is Oracle
instead using this to map >3G files on a tmpfs??

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/