linux-kernel - Re: Detailed Stack Information Patch [2/3]

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: <20090401193639.GB12316@elte.hu>
Date:	Wed, 1 Apr 2009 21:36:39 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Joerg Engel <joern@...fs.org>
Subject: Re: Detailed Stack Information Patch [2/3]


* Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net> wrote:

> +config PROC_STACK_MONITOR
> + 	default y
> +	depends on PROC_STACK
> +	bool "Enable /proc/stackmon detailed stack monitoring"
> + 	help
> +	  This enables detailed monitoring of process and thread stack
> +	  utilization via the /proc/stackmon interface.
> +	  Disabling these interfaces will reduce the size of the kernel by
> +	  approximately 2kb.

Hm, i'm not convinced about this one. Stupid question: what's wrong 
with ulimit -s?

Also, if for some reason you dont want to (or cannot) enforce a 
system-wide stack size ulimit, or it has some limitation that makes 
it impractical for you - if we add what i suggested to the 
/proc/*/maps files, your user-space watchdog daemon could scan those 
periodically and report any excesses and zap the culprit ... right?

	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/