linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] posix timers: allocate timer id per process

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: <50811FA6.8000709@parallels.com>
Date:	Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:38:46 +0400
From:	Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@...allels.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"devel@...nvz.org" <devel@...nvz.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...allels.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] posix timers: allocate timer id per process

19.10.2012 11:56, Eric Dumazet пишет:
> I wonder if some applications relied on our idr, assuming they would get
> low values for their timer id.
> (We could imagine some applications use a table indexed by the timer id)

Hmm.
Probably, this particular case can be optimised by tuning min_id to id of 
releasing timer (if id of this timer is less than current->signal min_id).
Does this approach solves the issue you mentioned above?

-- 
Best regards,
Stanislav Kinsbursky
--
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/