linux-kernel - Re: thread stacks and strict vm overcommit accounting

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070316013144.0d81c72d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Fri, 16 Mar 2007 01:31:44 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dan Aloni <da-x@...atomic.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: thread stacks and strict vm overcommit accounting

> > > With a typical size as a fuzz factor preaccounted in later kernels.
> > 
> > Where's that done?
> 
> I don't know what Alan is referring to there.

fs/exec.c - we add 20 pages to the stack vma size initially.

> We've no more committed to providing each instance with 8MB of stack,
> than we've committed to providing each instance with RLIMIT_AS of
> address space.  The rlimits are limits, not commitments, surely?

Yes, its just that the C programming language is utterly and
mindbogglingly broken when it comes to resource exhaustion for the stack.

Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/