From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=Mf6P=HK=lists.01.org=linux-nvdimm-bounces@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID,
	DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,
	SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C519C433E6
	for <linux-nvdimm@archiver.kernel.org>; Mon,  8 Feb 2021 10:51:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ml01.01.org (ml01.01.org [198.145.21.10])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6C0B64E7B
	for <linux-nvdimm@archiver.kernel.org>; Mon,  8 Feb 2021 10:51:50 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B6C0B64E7B
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org
Received: from ml01.vlan13.01.org (localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31A27100EB854;
	Mon,  8 Feb 2021 02:51:50 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=195.135.220.15; helo=mx2.suse.de; envelope-from=mhocko@suse.com; receiver=<UNKNOWN> 
Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4D66100EB851
	for <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>; Mon,  8 Feb 2021 02:51:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1;
	t=1612781506; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:
	 mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=HqDzYZJj1JL8yulwepFTzNw6Mh0UlkDMkwLo91us+Nw=;
	b=NW6cSXQt5vKQIC6IyRBjI03RsTggfacnmMQkPXVlyHTYQnhUREooi7Orv+OqfRI7917Lxz
	3nZxkT5RnnKOC3tcopxasEwHneBW4NQ+AZ2h7Uzl6P3ycEWbNjYfJ5Lj058U4V6l82Ro1L
	1F8EZ3u1FlnDVFRaGEZB3SZ5/MOrsnY=
Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27])
	by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DE41AC6E;
	Mon,  8 Feb 2021 10:51:46 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2021 11:51:45 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 08/10] PM: hibernate: disable when there are active
 secretmem users
Message-ID: <YCEXwUYepeQvEWTf@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <20210208084920.2884-1-rppt@kernel.org>
 <20210208084920.2884-9-rppt@kernel.org>
 <YCEP/bmqm0DsvCYN@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <38c0cad4-ac55-28e4-81c6-4e0414f0620a@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <38c0cad4-ac55-28e4-81c6-4e0414f0620a@redhat.com>
Message-ID-Hash: QHNXOLA6V7BGSGY43ZFC25T6F22DHWQD
X-Message-ID-Hash: QHNXOLA6V7BGSGY43ZFC25T6F22DHWQD
X-MailFrom: mhocko@suse.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Hits: nonmember-moderation
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation
CC: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@intel.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, James Bottomley <jejb@linux.ibm.com>, "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>, Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>, Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Tycho Ander
 sen <tycho@tycho.ws>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org, Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@jauu.net>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Linux-nvdimm developer list." <linux-nvdimm.lists.01.org>
Archived-At: <https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org/message/QHNXOLA6V7BGSGY43ZFC25T6F22DHWQD/>
List-Archive: <https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org/>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-nvdimm-request@lists.01.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:linux-nvdimm-join@lists.01.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org