[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100622153757.dcb6bda9.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:37:57 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Mike McCormack <mikem@...g3k.org>
Cc: oleg@...hat.com, kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, serue@...ibm.com,
jmorris@...ei.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: Add complete process group list
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 00:07:26 +0900
Mike McCormack <mikem@...g3k.org> wrote:
> If a process is in more than NGROUPS_SMALL (32) groups, it's not possible
> for any other user space process to determine the list of groups it is
> in using /proc/<pid>/status.
>
> Increasing the list of groups listed by /proc/<pid>/status would lead to
> very long lines that file, and possible misbehavior of userspace programs
> that parse /proc/<pid>/status, so instead I have opted to create a new
> file /proc/<pid>/groups, which contains the list of supplementary groups
> for each pid.
>
> The new file /proc/<pid>/groups consists of a single group id per line,
> with each line being 11 characters long. This should be enough space
> for 16bit or 32bit group ids.
>
> This feature might be useful for a server listening on a unix domain pipe
> to determine the list of groups that a client process is in from its pid.
"might be"?
It would be useful to hear a bit more about usage scenarios, why this
is needed, etc - some hard info which would justify permanent extension
of the kernel->userspace API. How does this get used, why is it
needed, what are the alternatives, etc.
I don't recall having heard of anyone using the groups fields in
/proc/pid/status before.
--
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