linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] minitty: a minimal TTY layer alternative for embedded systems

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: <92fb1e4a-d6df-f55b-c0a1-9c1eb78e3943@longlandclan.id.au>
Date:   Mon, 3 Apr 2017 08:44:04 +1000
From:   Stuart Longland <stuartl@...glandclan.id.au>
To:     Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] minitty: a minimal TTY layer alternative for
 embedded systems

On 03/04/17 07:41, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>> No PTYs seems like a big limitation. This means no sshd?
> Again, my ultimate system target is in the sub-megabyte of RAM.  I 
> really doubt you'll be able to fit an SSH server in there even if PTYs 
> were supported, unless sshd (or dropbear) can be made really tiny. 
> Otherwise you most probably have sufficient resources to run the regular 
> TTY code.

Are we talking small microcontrollers here?  The smallest machine in
terms of RAM I ever recall running Linux on was a 386SX/25 MHz with 4MB
RAM, and that had a MMU.

I recall Slackware requiring that you booted with a mounted floppy (no
ramdisk) and possibly even required that you had a second floppy drive
formatted as swap so you'd be able to get through the install without
oomkiller knocking on your door.

The same machine could also "run" Windows 95.  When I say "run", it was
more like a slow crawl.  Bull sharks washed onto land by flood waters
run faster.

Sub-megabyte system support is a noble goal, but I'm wondering how
practical such systems would be, and whether an embedded real-time
kernel might be a better choice than Linux on such systems.
-- 
Stuart Longland (aka Redhatter, VK4MSL)

I haven't lost my mind...
  ...it's backed up on a tape somewhere.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)