linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] mm: Fix RLIMIT

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:	Fri, 31 May 2013 11:27:04 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>
Cc:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
	trinity@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Roland Dreier <roland@...nel.org>, infinipath@...gic.com,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] mm: Fix RLIMIT_MEMLOCK


* KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com> wrote:

> >> I'm unhappy you guys uses offensive word so much. Please cool down all
> >> you guys. :-/ In fact, _BOTH_ the behavior before and after Cristoph's
> >> patch doesn't have cleaner semantics.
> >
> > Erm, this feature _regressed_ after the patch. All other concerns are
> > secondary. What's so difficult to understand about that?
> 
> Because it is not new commit at all. Christoph's patch was introduced
> 10 releases before.

That's indeed sad - resource limits are not typically tested by apps. The 
lack of Cc:s to people affected also helped hide the effects of the 
change.

> $ git describe bc3e53f682
> v3.1-7235-gbc3e53f
> 
> If we just revert it, we may get another and opposite regression report. 
> I'm worried about it. Moreover, I don't think discussion better fix is 
> too difficult for us.

Sure, I agree that a fix is generally better.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/