anonym wrote (30 Nov 2012 13:41:21 GMT) : > I didn't experience the "wipe_page: Cannot allocate memory" or > "spawn_new failed (1)" errors in either test.
Good news. I'm glad the bugs were fixed. > Well, while this branch makes the wipe much faster and better looking, > it's not as efficient as Tails' current parallel sdmem approach when > using a PAE kernel (which usually results in 0 occurrences in my tests, > if not it's just a few hundred occurences), which arguably is what most > users will use. For the non-PAE kernel I believe this branch is better, > though. > Are we sure we want this? OK, not in the current state of things. I summed up the current state of things in a new ticket so that it's not forgotten again: todo/hugetlb_mem_wipe. If things don't move forward on this side until 0.16 is out, we should not merge the branch again in experimental when we reset it post-0.16. I must say I don't feel competent to finish this work... but well, now that we ship a PAE kernel and a working implementation for it, the problem is actually limited to non-PAE systems with big amounts of memory as I understand it, so it's quite less of an emergency than it used to be. _______________________________________________ tails-dev mailing list tails-dev@boum.org https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev