On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov <kir...@shutemov.name> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 11:50:04AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 11:23 AM, One Thousand Gnomes >> <gno...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote: >> >> In the meantime, I created test that actually uses physical memory, >> >> 8MB apart, as described in some footnote. It is attached. It should >> >> work, but it needs boot with specific config options and specific >> >> kernel parameters. >> > >> > Why not just use hugepages. You know the alignment guarantees for 1GB >> > pages and that means you don't even need to be root >> > >> > In fact - should we be disabling 1GB huge page support by default at this >> > point, at least on non ECC boxes ? >> >> Can you actually damage anyone else's data using a 1 GB hugepage? > > hugetlbfs is a filesystem: the answer is yes. Although I don't see the > issue as a big attach vector.
What I mean is: if I map a 1 GB hugepage and rowhammer it, is it likely that the corruption will be confined to the same 1 GB? --Andy > > -- > Kirill A. Shutemov -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
