linux-kernel - Re: is RSDL an "unfair" scheduler too?

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: <45FEB50E.2040104@aitel.hist.no>
Date:	Mon, 19 Mar 2007 17:06:38 +0100
From:	Helge Hafting <helge.hafting@...el.hist.no>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...o.co.il>
CC:	davids@...master.com,
	"Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: is RSDL an "unfair" scheduler too?

Avi Kivity wrote:
>
> A fairly contrived example, but I see your point.  Of course any 
> system can be broken.  I think that user-level scheduling is good for 
> real multi user systems, where 'user' means a person, not an 
> artificial entity.  It's also good for a multi application server, 
> where typically each service runs (or can be made to run) as a 
> separate user.
For a not so contrived example, look at email delivery.  Some mailservers do
all work as root (or some fixed email user)

Some servers will switch to the UID of the user receiving the message, 
limiting the
damage in case of buffer overflow etc. A fair amount of work is then done
as that user - running the message through virus/spam-checks and
then perhaps procmail.

Helge Hafting
-
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/