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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 10:07:26 -0700 From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com> To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com> CC: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] nextfd(2) (4/4/12 9:43 AM), Ulrich Drepper wrote: > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:38, KOSAKI Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@...il.com> wrote: >> As far as I understand, any major open source project don't use >> posix_spawn(). >> Please remind, I'm talking about real world issue. > > This doesn't mean they shouldn't. If you require code to be changed > anyway let them change to something which doesn't require more cruft > in the kernel. The limitations you cited are irrelevant for > posix_spawn. And perhaps there will be actually spawn support in the > kernel which would make dealing with OOM situations and non-overcommit > much easier. Umm... I'm sorry. I haven't catch why OOM is related topic. Could you please elaborate more? -- 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