linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][RF C/T/D] Unmapped page cache control

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:10:41 +0000
From:	Chris Webb <chris@...chsys.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc:	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	KVM development list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RF C/T/D] Unmapped page cache control - via boot
 parameter

Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com> writes:

> On 03/22/2010 11:04 PM, Chris Webb wrote:
>
> >Unless I'm missing something, the risk to guest OSes in this configuration
> >should therefore be exactly the same as the risk from running on normal
> >commodity hardware with such drives and no expensive battery-backed RAM.
> 
> A host crash will destroy your data.  If  your machine is connected
> to a UPS, only a firmware crash can destroy your data.

Yes, that's a good point: in this configuration a host crash is equivalent
to a power failure rather than a OS crash in terms of data loss.

Cheers,

Chris.
--
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/