linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH]: exec: avoid propagating PF_NO

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:	Thu, 28 Nov 2013 15:38:57 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, zhang.yi20@....com.cn,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: exec: avoid propagating PF_NO_SETAFFINITY into
 userspace child

On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 09:13:29AM -0500, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > A single parent process for all usermode helpers makes so much sense;
> > not doing it is just weird.
> 
> If we're gonna allow userland to play with the parent attributes,
> yeah, that'd make sense.  I'm not sure whether that's an interface
> that we'd want to commit to tho?  Do we really want to tell userland
> "there will always be a kernel task khelper and if you change that
> one's attributes all processes forked from it will inherit those
> attributes no matter what they are."  I think we'd want something more
> specific cause that's a lot of commitment to things that we haven't
> carefully thought about.

It seems like a perfectly fine interface to me. And much preferable to
creating yet another weird interface to manage tasks.
--
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/