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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <6BD015BC-3F6A-4839-9A66-DB2E322F5B74@mac.com>
Date:	Sun, 1 Apr 2007 14:43:52 -0400
From:	Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>
To:	devzero@....de
Cc:	Ken Chen <kenchen@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] remove artificial software max_loop limit

On Apr 01, 2007, at 14:36:11, devzero@....de wrote:
>> 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
>
> what sense would it make to set an upper limit at all?
>
> we`re so happy to have none anymore :)

Well, the point of an upper limit might be to keep loop devices from  
chewing up too much memory on a system.  IE: To fail allocating more  
loopdevs before you run OOM and start killing random userspace  
processes.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

-
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/