linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/14] Pramfs: Persistent and protected ram filesystem

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: <20090613155957.GA16220@shareable.org>
Date:	Sat, 13 Jun 2009 16:59:57 +0100
From:	Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>
To:	Marco <marco.stornelli@...il.com>
Cc:	Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Embedded <linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Daniel Walker <dwalker@....ucsc.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] Pramfs: Persistent and protected ram filesystem

Marco wrote:
> Linux traditionally had no support for a persistent, non-volatile
> RAM-based filesystem, persistent meaning the filesystem survives a
> system reboot or power cycle intact. The RAM-based filesystems such as
> tmpfs and ramfs have no actual backing store but exist entirely in the
> page and buffer caches, hence the filesystem disappears after a system
> reboot or power cycle.

Why is a ramdisk not sufficient for this?

Why is an entire filesystem needed, instead of simply a block driver
if the ramdisk driver cannot be used?

It just struck me as a lot of code which might be completely
unnecessary for the desired functionality.

-- Jamie
--
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/