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: <20071222120959.475ebced@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Date:	Sat, 22 Dec 2007 12:09:59 -0800
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Matthew Bloch <matthew@...emark.co.uk>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Testing RAM from userspace / question about memmap= arguments

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:06:24 +0000
Matthew Bloch <matthew@...emark.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi - I'm trying to come up with a way of thoroughly testing every byte
> of RAM from within Linux on amd64 (so that it can be automated better
> than using memtest86+), and came up with an idea which I'm not sure is
> supported or practical.
> 
> The obvious problem with testing memory from user space is that you
> can't mlock all of it, so the best you can do is about three quarters,
> and hope that the rest of the memory is okay.

well... to be honest the more obvious problem will be that you won't be testing the RAM, you'll be testing the CPU's cache.. over and over again.

memtest86+ does various magic to basically bypass the caches (by disabling them ;-)...
Doing that in a live kernel situation, and from userspace to boot...... that's... and issue.
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ