[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090125122039.GA16603@brong.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 23:20:39 +1100
From: Bron Gondwana <brong@...tmail.fm>
To: Bron Gondwana <brong@...tmail.fm>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
stable@...nel.org, Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org>,
Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@....linux.org.uk>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Chuck Wolber <chuckw@...ntumlinux.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 016/104] epoll: introduce resource usage limits
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 10:01:27PM +1100, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 12:03:34AM +1100, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> > The attached patches do this - the first bumps the default to 1024, and
> > the second adds /proc/sys/fs/epoll/limits which contains 4 values. The
> > first two are the maximum current value for each field, and the second
> > two are the values of max_user_instances and max_user_watches again,
> > similar to the file-max interface.
>
> And this third one (on top of the other two) adds the UIDs of the most
> heavily using users to the "limits" file, to help you track them down.
Patch 4 - I'll stop now ;)
Allow '0' for unlimited for both limits.
I notice that root gets limited same as anyone else. Any opinion on
special-casing root and not limiting the number of epolls they can
create? There are plenty of other ways root can be nasty if it's so
inclined!
Bron.
View attachment "0004-epoll-allow-0-for-unlimited-on-epoll-limits.patch" of type "text/x-diff" (1343 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists