linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] tmpfs: support user quotas

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: <20111107234337.1dc9d612@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 7 Nov 2011 23:43:37 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de>
Cc:	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@....org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] tmpfs: support user quotas

On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 00:07:12 +0100
Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de> wrote:

> On Mon, 07.11.11 22:53, Alan Cox (alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk) wrote:
> 
> > Per user would be quota, per process would be rlimit. Quite simple
> > really, nice standard interfaces we've had for years. Various systems
> 
> Uh, have you ever really looked at resource limits? Some of them are
> per-user, not per-process, i.e. RLIMIT_NPROC. And this would just be
> another one.

NPROC is a bit of an oddity.

And the standards have no idea how a resource limit hit for an fs would
be reported, nor how an app installer would check for it. Quota on the
other hand is defined behaviour.

--
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/