| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:50:55 +0200 From: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org> To: Pekka J Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> Cc: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Back to the future. Am Freitag, 27. April 2007 08:18 schrieb Pekka J Enberg: > On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > COW is a possibility, but I understood (perhaps wrongly) that Linus was > > thinking of a single syscall or such like to prepare the snapshot. If > > you're going to start doing things like this, won't that mean you'd then > > have to update/redo the snapshot or somehow nullify the effect of > > anything the programs does so that doing it again after the snapshot is > > restored doesn't cause problems? > > No. The snapshot is just that. A snapshot in time. From kernel point of > view, it doesn't matter one bit what when you did it or if the state has > changed before you resume. It's up to userspace to make sure the user > doesn't do real work while the snapshot is being written to disk and > machine is shut down. And where is the benefit in that? How is such user space freezing logic simpler than having the kernel do the write? What can you do in user space if all filesystems are r/o that is worth the hassle? Regards Oliver - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists