linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 01/17] mm: support madvise(MADV

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: <56458720.4010400@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 13 Nov 2015 01:45:52 -0500
From:	Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>
To:	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Jason Evans <je@...com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
	Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/17] mm: support madvise(MADV_FREE)

> And now I am thinking if we use access bit, we could implment MADV_FREE_UNDO
> easily when we need it. Maybe, that's what you want. Right?

Yes, but why the access bit instead of the dirty bit for that? It could
always be made more strict (i.e. access bit) in the future, while going
the other way won't be possible. So I think the dirty bit is really the
more conservative choice since if it turns out to be a mistake it can be
fixed without a backwards incompatible change.


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)