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:	Sun, 04 May 2014 10:19:44 -0700
From:	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>
To:	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
Cc:	Marian Marinov <mm@...com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPC initialize shmmax and shmall from the current value
 not the default

On Sun, 2014-05-04 at 13:17 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Hi Marian,
> 
> Note: The limits will soon be increased to (nearly) ULONG_MAX.
> I.e.: If you propose the patch because you are running into issues with 
> a too small SEMMAX after an unshare(CLONE_NEWIPC), then this will be 
> fixed soon.
> 
> 
> On 05/04/2014 01:53 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > On Sun, 2014-05-04 at 01:48 +0300, Marian Marinov wrote:
> >> When we are creating new IPC namespace that should be cloned from the current namespace it is a good idea to copy the
> >> values of the current shmmax and shmall to the new namespace.
> The idea sounds reasonable:
> If an admin has reduced the limits, then the reduction should also apply 
> after a unshare(CLONE_NEWIPC).
> 
> But:
> Your patch doesn't use the current shmmax, it uses the shmmax from 
> init_ipc_ns.
> Would it be possible to use the current values?
> 
> > Why is this a good idea?
> >
> > This would break userspace that relies on the current behavior.
> > Furthermore we've recently changed the default value of both these
> > limits to be as large as you can get, thus deprecating them. I don't
> > like the idea of this being replaced by namespaces.
> Davidlohr: We are not deprecating them, we make the default huge.
> The limits should stay as usable as they were.

Deprecating them in the sense that hopefully users will not set them
anymore. I'm not saying lets add the word "deprecated" it in the
manpage...

> 
> With regards to breaking user space, I must think about it a bit more.
> Right now, each new namespace starts with SEMMAX=32MB, i.e. an often 
> unusable default.
> 
> --
>      Manfred


--
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