Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm,fork,security: introduce MADV_WIPEONFORK

On Mon 07-08-17 16:19:18, Florian Weimer wrote:

On 08/07/2017 03:46 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:

quoted

How do they know that they need to regenerate if they do not get SEGV?
Are they going to assume that a read of zeros is a "must init again"? Isn't
that too fragile?

Why would it be fragile?  Some level of synchronization is needed to set
things up, of course, but I think it's possible to write a lock-free
algorithm to maintain the state even without strong guarantees of memory
ordering from fork.

Yeah, that is what I meant as fragile... I am not question this is
impossible.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs