linux-kernel - Re: [patch] remove artificial software max

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: <b040c32a0704011110n639d6ea4h447646b6da92974e@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 1 Apr 2007 11:10:26 -0700
From:	"Ken Chen" <kenchen@...gle.com>
To:	"Tomas M" <tomas@...x.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] remove artificial software max_loop limit

On 4/1/07, Tomas M <tomas@...x.org> wrote:
> I believe that IF you _really_ need to preserve the max_loop module
> parameter, then the parameter should _not_ be ignored, rather it should
> have the same function like before - to limit the loop driver so if you
> use max_loop=10 for example, it should not allow loop.c to create more
> than 10 loops.

Blame on the dual meaning of max_loop that it uses currently: to
initialize a set of loop devices and as a side effect, it also sets
the upper limit.  People are complaining about the former constrain,
isn't it?  Does anyone uses the 2nd meaning of upper limit?

- Ken
-
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/