Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 00:59:00 +0200
From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@novell.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: mlock(1)
Message-ID: <20040924225900.GY3309@dualathlon.random>
References: <41547C16.4070301@pobox.com> <20040924132247.W1973@build.pdx.osdl.net> <1096060045.10800.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1096060045.10800.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1014
Lines: 18

On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 10:07:25PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Keys are a different case anyway. We can swap them if we have encrypted
> swap (hardware or software) and we could use the crypto lib just to
> crypt some pages in swap although that might be complex. As such a
> MAP_CRYPT seems better than mlock. If we don't have cryptable swap then
> fine its mlock.

I really like encrypted swap, it should already work fine, I think we
should make it the default. The cpu cost during swapping should be
really not significant. It's needed anyways for running suspend on a
laptop (currently suspend dumps into the swap the cleartext key of any
cryptoloop device, making cryptoloop pretty much useless).  And the good
thing is that it won't even need to ask for a password.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/