linux-kernel - Re: [patch] cpusets: allow empty {cpus,mems}_allowed to be set for unpopulated cpuset

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: <20070501202201.6903d922.pj@sgi.com>
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/