Re: problems with 2.4.0 kernal and int patch

[Gisle S{lensminde <gisle@ii.uib.no>]

On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Dale Amon wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 03:20:23PM +0000, Marc Mutz wrote:
> > Morbid Angel wrote:
> > >
>
> However I also still have the problem and have not seen an answer
> back to my debug query (help begging missive) on the issue.
>
> In my own case it simply is not possible to "make it smaller". I need a
> very large secure file system and it is not for a personal computer. There
> are reasons, but if I told you I'd have to shred you :-)
>
> I can't help think that there are other secure system projects blocked on
> this same requirement.
>
> I really want to get this issue sorted, and I've gone into gdb and
> I've written the test file that shows the issue must be in either
> the kernel or libraries associated with the open() call, not
> specifically in the loop back or crypto.

The 2GB problem on loopback devices (that not is part of kerneli) is
a wellknown problem. Since this is a deep kernel problem, the kernel
list is a better place for this issue. There are people working on
this problem, but they don't read this list. This problem impacts
much more than crypto partitions. It is for example not possible to
mount disk images > 2 GB. This makes it hard or impossible to
mount DVD images on harddisk. I think Jens Axboe is working on the
problem, and have a patch for it. (But I as far as I know he don't
subscribe to this list)

http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/axboe/patches/

The patches are not included in the mianstream kernel yet, and
I don't know whether that breaks something else, but you can try.

> Also, is Gisle coming back or is there any sign of someone doing
> a 2.4.2 int patch? The 2.4.0 still applies, but...

:-)

I have not upgraded to 2.4 yet, since my computer is too slow for
that. I have ordered a new computer, so maybe in the future sometime, but
don't hold your breath.

--
Gisle Sælensminde ( gisle@ii.uib.no )

With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not
necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going
to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly
overhead. (from RFC 1925)



Linux-crypto:  cryptography in and on the Linux system
Archive:       http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-crypto/