Re: DRAM unreliable under specific access patern

[Andy Lutomirski]

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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
>> <gnomes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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 majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/