linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ipc,shm: increase default size for shmmax

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: <CAHGf_=rH+vfFzRrh35TETxjFU2HM0xnDQFweQ+Bfw20Pm2nL3g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 1 Apr 2014 19:56:18 -0400
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>
To:	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>, aswin@...com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipc,shm: increase default size for shmmax

>> > Ah-hah, that's interesting info.
>> >
>> > Let's make the default 64GB?
>>
>> 64GB is infinity at that time, but it no longer near infinity today. I like
>> very large or total memory proportional number.
>
> So I still like 0 for unlimited. Nice, clean and much easier to look at
> than ULONG_MAX. And since we cannot disable shm through SHMMIN, I really
> don't see any disadvantages, as opposed to some other arbitrary value.
> Furthermore it wouldn't break userspace: any existing sysctl would
> continue to work, and if not set, the user never has to worry about this
> tunable again.
>
> Please let me know if you all agree with this...

Surething. Why not. :)
--
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/