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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 20:22:01 -0700 From: Paul Jackson <pj@....com> To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, menage@...gle.com, clameter@...ulhu.engr.sgi.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] cpusets: allow empty {cpus,mems}_allowed to be set for unpopulated cpuset David wrote: > You currently cannot remove all cpus or mems from cpus_allowed or > mems_allowed of a cpuset. We now allow both if there are no attached > tasks. Why do you need this? It adds a little more code, and changes semantics a little bit, so I'd think it should have at least a little bit of justfication. + if (!*buf) { + cpus_clear(trialcs.cpus_allowed); Won't the above code fail if someone does: echo > /dev/cpuset/foobar/mems Just guessing, but I'd expect buf[] to contain a newline char, not just a zero length string, at this point. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@....com> 1.925.600.0401 - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists