linux-kernel - Re: [patch 3/4] c/r: procfs: add arg_start/end, env_start/end and exit

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:	Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:18:14 +0400
From:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
	Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 3/4] c/r: procfs: add arg_start/end, env_start/end and
 exit_code members to /proc/$pid/stat

On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:12:45PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:54:50 +0400 Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > > /proc/pid/stat is getting out of control.  People are now sending patches
> > > because reading from this thing already takes too long.
> 
> err, actually, that was /proc/stat/
> 

Ah! (I saw those thread, but then I get confused and thought maybe there were
for /proc/pid/stat as well but I simply missed it ;)

> > 
> > I can add prctl PR_GET_MM with subcodes, since PR_SET_MM is already here
> > and wrapped with CHECKPOINT_RESTORE. Would this be better?
> 
> mm, not really - /proc is the logical/expected place for it.
> 
> I'm thinking that perhaps we should start again with all of this and
> export all this information in brand new, well-designed procfs files. 
> We'd still maintain /proc/stat and /proc/pid/stat but people should
> migrate off them.  Eventually (10 years?) everyone will be setting their
> CONFIG_PROC_[PID_]STAT to 'n' and perhaps we can retire the things.
> 
> Meanwhile, I suppose you may as well continue to make /proc/pid/stat
> even crazier :(  It isn't as bad as /proc/stat!
> 

At moment indeed it's not that bloated... yet.

> btw, do we really need to do "(mm && permitted)" so many times?  ie,
> can we split that seq_printf up and do
> 
> 	if (mm && permitted) {
> 		seq_printf(m + offset, "%lu", mm->start_data);
> 		...
> 	} else {
> 		seq_printf(m + offset, "0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0");
> 	}
> 
> ?  Although this probably won't help much.
> 

Yeah we can. I'll update.

	Cyrill
--
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/