linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] show message when exceeded rlimit of pending signals

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:	Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:38:00 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	nooiwa <nooiwa@...aclelinux.com>
Cc:	roland@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, oleg@...hat.com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, h-shimamoto@...jp.nec.com,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] show message when exceeded rlimit of pending signals


* nooiwa <nooiwa@...aclelinux.com> wrote:

> +++ b/kernel/sysctl.c
> @@ -67,6 +67,7 @@ static int deprecated_sysctl_warning(struct __sysctl_args *args);
>  /* External variables not in a header file. */
>  extern int C_A_D;
>  extern int print_fatal_signals;
> +extern int print_reach_rlimit_sigpending;

Ooiwa-san, Roland, Andrew - what do you think about just making this 
part of the existing print_fatal_signals flag, instead of adding a new 
one?

Signal queue overflows are a 'fatal', signal-related condition as well - 
we lose a signal in essence. The patch would be smaller as well.

	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/