linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][RFC] add MAP

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: <20091007185952.GC19692@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:59:52 +0200
From:	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
To:	Olivier Galibert <galibert@...ox.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] add MAP_UNLOCKED mmap flag

On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 08:50:54PM +0200, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 02:16:03PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > I did. It allows me to achieve something I can't now. Steps you provide
> > just don't fit my needs. I need all memory areas (current and feature) to be
> > locked except one. Very big one. You propose to lock memory at some
> > arbitrary point and from that point on all newly mapped memory areas will
> > be unlocked. Don't you see it is different?
> 
> What about mlockall(MCL_CURRENT); mmap(...); mlockall(MCL_FUTURE);?
> Or toggle MCL_FUTURE if a mlockall call can stop it?
> 
This may work. And MCL_FUTURE can be toggled, but this is not thread
safe.
 
--
			Gleb.
--
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/