lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Feb]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v17 08/10] PM: hibernate: disable when there are active secretmem users
On Mon 08-02-21 11:53:58, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 08.02.21 11:51, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 08-02-21 11:32:11, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > On 08.02.21 11:18, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Mon 08-02-21 10:49:18, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > > > From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > It is unsafe to allow saving of secretmem areas to the hibernation
> > > > > snapshot as they would be visible after the resume and this essentially
> > > > > will defeat the purpose of secret memory mappings.
> > > > >
> > > > > Prevent hibernation whenever there are active secret memory users.
> > > >
> > > > Does this feature need any special handling? As it is effectivelly
> > > > unevictable memory then it should behave the same as other mlock, ramfs
> > > > which should already disable hibernation as those cannot be swapped out,
> > > > no?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Why should unevictable memory not go to swap when hibernating? We're merely
> > > dumping all of our system RAM (including any unmovable allocations) to swap
> > > storage and the system is essentially completely halted.
> > >
> > My understanding is that mlock is never really made visible via swap
> > storage.
>
> "Using swap storage for hibernation" and "swapping at runtime" are two
> different things. I might be wrong, though.

Well, mlock is certainly used to keep sensitive information, not only to
protect from major/minor faults.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-08 12:05    [W:0.142 / U:1.976 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site