[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090324210536.GB14067@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 22:05:36 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
ia6432@...ox.ru, roland@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [tip:timers/urgent] posix timers: fix RLIMIT_CPU && fork()
* Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 03/23, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Commit-ID: 37bebc70d7ad4144c571d74500db3bb26ec0c0eb
> > Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/37bebc70d7ad4144c571d74500db3bb26ec0c0eb
> > Author: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
> > AuthorDate: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 20:34:11 +0100
> > Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> > CommitDate: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 20:43:35 +0100
> >
> > posix timers: fix RLIMIT_CPU && fork()
> >
> > See http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12911
> >
> > copy_signal() copies signal->rlim, but RLIMIT_CPU is "lost". Because
> > posix_cpu_timers_init_group() sets cputime_expires.prof_exp = 0 and thus
> > fastpath_timer_check() returns false unless we have other cpu timers.
> >
> > This is the minimal fix for 2.6.29 (tested) and 2.6.28. The patch is not
> > optimal,
>
> Ingo, please drop this patch, it is very suboptimal.
suboptimal why?
> My intent was to make the obviously correct patch for 2.6.29, but
> since it was already released I'll send another one.
Please send it - thanks.
Ingo
--
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