linux-kernel - Re: PIDs Controller Limit

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: <20150925153912.GG4449@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date:	Fri, 25 Sep 2015 11:39:12 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PIDs Controller Limit

Hello, Aleksa.

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 09:42:38AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> Does it make sense for the PIDs controller to allow a user to set a
> limit of 0? Since we don't cancel attaches, a limit of 0 doesn't
> affect anything (nothing stops attaches, and you need to have a
> process in the PIDs cgroup in order for fork()s to be affected by the
> limit). So I think that attempting to set pid.limit to 0 should return
> an -EINVAL.

I don't know.  Why does it matter?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/