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: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:25:52 -0700 From: Dave Hansen <haveblue@...ibm.com> To: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com> Cc: balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux MM Mailing List <linux-mm@...ck.org>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org> Subject: Re: [-mm PATCH] Memory controller improve user interface On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 15:20 -0700, Paul Menage wrote: > > I'd argue that having the user's specified limit be truncated to the > page size is less confusing than giving an EINVAL if it's not page > aligned. Do we truncate mmap() values to the nearest page so to not confuse the user? ;) Imagine a careful application setting and accounting for limits on a long-running system. Might its internal accounting get sufficiently misaligned from the kernel's after a while to cause a problem? Truncating values like that would appear reserve significantly less memory than desired over a long period of time. -- Dave - 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