https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=219495 --- Comment #33 from jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx --- (In reply to Matthew Garrett from comment #32) > calculated size of the log rather than for the table's buffer size. An > alternative approach to allocating the LAML would be to map the log area, > use the code we already have for calculating how long the log *actually* is, > and then only allocating that, which would be more computationally intensive > but would probably save RAM? So what you're saying matches what I'm suggesting for the most part doesn't it? [1] [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/D6FS8ALS4HSV.2CSS6SGE8ND09@xxxxxxxxxx/ -- You may reply to this email to add a comment. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching the assignee of the bug.
