linux-kernel - Re: + prctl-add-pr_setget_child_reaper-to-allow-simple-process-supervision .patch added to -mm tree

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: <1313714913.29251.7.camel@mop>
Date:	Fri, 19 Aug 2011 02:48:31 +0200
From:	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-man@...r.kernel.org, roland@...k.frob.com
Subject: Re: +
 prctl-add-pr_setget_child_reaper-to-allow-simple-process-supervision .patch
 added to -mm tree

On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 15:22 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org> wrote:
> >
> > It will be used for all new service managers. UNIX is a pain if you want
> > to watch your children regarding double-forking, if you are not init.
> 
> I'll believe that "all new service managers" when I see it. Until
> then, a new feature is just that - a new feature. Which nobody uses.

That feature will be used in Fedora 17 if we get that properly working.
Promised!

So far we have a pretty good track record in immediately using the stuff
we add to the kernel. People working on the other side usually complain
that we always require such new kernels. :)

> > If you want, we can make the forked processes inherit a flag if the
> > 'subreaper' should be looked up at all. Then we have almost zero
> > overhead if the feature isn't used. You think that's needed?
> 
> Yes, I do. Because with any current system, that "almost zero
> overhead" is just totally wasted effort entirely for zero gain. Which
> just makes me go "Eww".

Yeah, understood. I'll change it with the next round, and we can see how
to go from there.

Thanks,
Kay

--
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/