| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <200707060951.47555.oliver@neukum.org> Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 09:51:47 +0200 From: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org> To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> Cc: rjw@...k.pl, nigel@...pend2.net, pavel@....cz, benh@...nel.crashing.org, mjg59@...f.ucam.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway Am Freitag, 6. Juli 2007 schrieb Miklos Szeredi: > > > You're missing the point. I'm arguing that a sync from within the freezer > > > should guarantee that there is no data loss. > > > > Well, it should, but it doesn't ... > > > > Moreover, if FUSE implements syncing, then the sync from within the freezer > > will almost certainly deadlock. > > Rafael, think positively: by the time fuse implements sync(), the > freezer will be long gone ;) Now you are entering really dangerous territory. If you can implement a meaningfull sync method, you must have dirty pages in the page cache. That means you are in the page freeing path of the vm. Then we are in real trouble. Don't even think about it. As far as suspend/hibernate is concerned, get yourself on the new notifying chain and revert to synchronous operations when notified. 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