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: <11158.1175962732@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date:	Sat, 07 Apr 2007 12:18:52 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
Cc:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
	Ken Chen <kenchen@...gle.com>, Tomas M <tomas@...x.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] remove artificial software max_loop limit

On Fri, 06 Apr 2007 16:33:32 EDT, Bill Davidsen said:
> Jan Engelhardt wrote:

> > Who cares if the user specifies max_loop=8 but still is able to open up 
> > /dev/loop8, loop9, etc.? max_loop=X basically meant (at least to me) 
> > "have at least X" loops ready.
> > 
> You have just come up with a really good reason not to do unlimited 
> loops.

That, and I'd expect the intuitive name for "have at least N ready" to
be 'min_loop=N'.  'max_loop=N' means (to me, at least) "If I ask for N+1,
something has obviously gone very wrong, so please shoot my process before
it gets worse".

Maybe what's needed is *both* a max_ and min_ parameter?

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped