linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] mlock: avoid dirtying pages and triggering writeback

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]

Date:	Thu, 18 Nov 2010 05:43:06 -0500
From:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....EDU>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Kosaki Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Theodore Tso <tytso@...gle.com>,
	Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>,
	Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mlock: avoid dirtying pages and triggering writeback


On Nov 18, 2010, at 12:46 AM, Nick Piggin wrote:

> The right way to fix this would not be to introduce the new regression
> but either/both: a specific syscall to mlock-for-read which does not do
> any reservations, fix filesystem hook to allow reservation without
> implying dirtying. A simple flag to page_mkwrite will be enough (plus
> the logic to call it from VM).

Why is it at all important that mlock() force block allocation for sparse blocks?    It's  not at all specified in the mlock() API definition that it does that.

Are there really programs that assume that mlock() == fallocate()?!?

-- Ted


--
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/