linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies

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]

Date:	Thu, 1 Nov 2007 10:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
cc:	rientjes@...gle.com, Lee.Schermerhorn@...com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ak@...e.de
Subject: Re: [RFC] cpuset relative memory policies - second choice

On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Paul Jackson wrote:

> Christoph wrote:
> > The library interface can set flags to modify behavior.
> 
> A library such as libnuma can set them, yes, but not everyone uses
> libnuma.  Basically everyone uses the standard C library, glibc, which
> has the system call wrappers, but these wrappers should not be setting
> optional flags.
> 
> We're going around in circles here, Christoph.

Yes and you keep missing the point focusing on stuff that is not relevant.
Where did you get the rule that libraries should not be setting flags? 
libraries do all sort of conversion before calling the kernel API.

Look the libraries are a strong argument against the method of setting 
task flags. If you are using multiple libraries some of which have been 
updated and some of those which have not then setting a task flag can 
have bad consequences. You want clean syscall behavior.
-
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/