Re: [RFC]: mm,power: introduce MADV_WIPEONSUSPEND

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun 12-07-20 09:22:28, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Tue 2020-07-07 12:00:41, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 7 Jul 2020, at 9:37, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > Please go through the thread and try to understand it.
> > > 
> > > You'd need syscalls per get_randomness(), not per migration.
> > 
> > I think one check per get_randomness() is sufficient, though putting it at
> > the end of the critical section rather than the beginning helps.
> 
> Yeah, well, one syscall is still enough to make it useless.

I am sorry but I really do not follow. Why would you want to call a
syscall on each get_randomness invocation? Why is it not enough to
simply have a flag that tells that an external event has happened
and reinitialize if the flag is set? Yes this wouldn't be really sync
operation but does that matter? Is using a few random numbers from the
old pool just because the notifier hasn't processed and flag the
situation a major security concern?

Btw. let me just clarify that I am not by any means pushing a solution
like that. All I am saying is that MADV_WIPEONSUSPEND is inherently
subtle interface that we likely want to avoid.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux