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: <CAOviyahKJthwLTND51HhaRNB_KJC60T7HFHjdqPZf3pQmAUAhw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 3 Mar 2015 00:31:19 +1100
From:	Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
To:	Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@...il.com>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Tim Hockin <thockin@...kin.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, lizefan@...wei.com,
	richard@....at, mingo@...hat.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	peterz@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] add nproc cgroup subsystem

> If 16-bit PID's aren't a concern anymore, then why do we still default to
> treating it like a 16-bit signed int (the default for
> /proc/sys/kernel/pid_max is 32768)?

I just want to emphasise that *even if* we changed to another default
limit, the mere existence of a system-wide pid_max makes PIDs a
resource.

--
Aleksa Sarai (cyphar)
www.cyphar.com
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ