linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/17] 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 11 Jun 2012 08:28:20 +0200
From:	Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>
To:	Christian Stroetmann <stroetmann@...olinux.com>
Cc:	Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/17] pramfs: persistent and protected RAM filesystem

2012/6/10 Christian Stroetmann <stroetmann@...olinux.com>:
> On Sun, June 10, 2012 Marco Stornelli wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> after the merge of pramfs in the LTSI kernel and after the "hot topic" NVM
>> Mapping API, here a new submission of pramfs code. Even if the code won't be
>> in mainline the review is really useful to me, so any comment is welcome.
>
> Hello
>
> I think we have here two cases:
> 1. "A block of non-volatile RAM separate for normal system memory",
> [documentation Pramfs] and
> 2. The whole RAM is non-volatile and so the whole situation is changed, and
> an NVM Mapping API is needed and "hotly" discussed.
>
> For 1. your solution is a very good concept that is getting around issues
> solely related with specific optimizations for disc-based file systems, like
> the 2 problems described in the documentation of Pramfs, but
> for 2. there is no need for a file system anymore, as we use it today while
> working with a computer system, because data needs not to be written to a
> file system at all, and so the file system will become something like a
> backup system in the most common use cases of a computing device, if I
> should describe it a little bit too provocative. In this case your approach
> taken to handle the 2 problems mentioned in the documentation of Pramfs
> would have to be driven further by focusing more on the management of the
> RAM, the power, and the long-term data storage (backup) for harmonizing
> Pramfs with them. A further point is to make Pramfs bootable, if this not
> already possible somehow.
>

I have to say that this submission doesn't want to be a complete
answer to the "NVM Mapping API", no way, but eventually only part of
the solution. Pramfs was bootable, but the support was removed,
however the modification would be easy.

Marco
--
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/