[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3b64de85-beb4-5a07-0093-cad6e8f2a8d8@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 14:54:13 +0800
From: Xiaoming Ni <nixiaoming@...wei.com>
To: <aarcange@...hat.com>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<cracauer@...s.org>, <dplotnikov@...tuozzo.com>,
<gokhale2@...l.gov>, <hannes@...xchg.org>, <hughd@...gle.com>,
<jglisse@...hat.com>, <kirill@...temov.name>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<maxime.coquelin@...hat.com>, <mcfadden8@...l.gov>,
<mcgrof@...nel.org>, <mgorman@...e.de>, <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
<pbonzini@...hat.com>, <peterx@...hat.com>,
<rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, <xemul@...tuozzo.com>,
<keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] userfaultfd/sysctl: add
vm.unprivileged_userfaultfd
On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 11:07:22AM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> Add a global sysctl knob "vm.unprivileged_userfaultfd" to control
> whether userfaultfd is allowed by unprivileged users. When this is
> set to zero, only privileged users (root user, or users with the
> CAP_SYS_PTRACE capability) will be able to use the userfaultfd
> syscalls.
Hello
I am a bit confused about this patch, can you help to answer it.
Why the sysctl interface of fs/userfaultfd.c belongs to vm_table instead
of fs_table ?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=cefdca0a86be517bc390fc4541e3674b8e7803b0
Thanks
Xiaoming Ni
Powered by blists - more mailing lists