linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 14/15] libnvdimm: support read-only btt backing devices

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: <x49ioafwx55.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 22 Jun 2015 12:00:54 -0400
From:	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	"linux-nvdimm\@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>,
	"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/15] libnvdimm: support read-only btt backing devices

Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 11:02:24AM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> Agreed, we can't audit all code, and springing this potential data
>> corruptor on people seems irresponsible.
>
> How do "the people" know they'd have to use btt in the current setup
> without auditing their stack first?

Right now, the guidance should be to always use btt since there are no
applications that are directly taking advantage of persistent memory
(that I know).  I expect documentation would take care of that.  I also
expect that, as applications add support, they would note the
requirement for dax mountpoints in their documentation.

So, "the people" find out the same way they always have.  :)

Cheers,
Jeff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/