linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Increase default MLOCK

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:   Tue, 16 Nov 2021 11:47:27 -0800
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     "Drew DeVault" <sir@...wn.com>
Cc:     "Ammar Faizi" <ammarfaizi2@...weeb.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        "io_uring Mailing List" <io-uring@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Jens Axboe" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        "Pavel Begunkov" <asml.silence@...il.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Increase default MLOCK_LIMIT to 8 MiB

On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 07:32:33 +0100 "Drew DeVault" <sir@...wn.com> wrote:

> > And a question: rather than messing around with a constant which will
> > need to be increased again in a couple of years, can we solve this one
> > and for all? For example, permit root to set the system-wide
> > per-process max mlock size and depend upon initscripts to do this
> > appropriately.
> 
> Not sure I understand. Root and init scripts can already manage this
> number - the goal of this patch is just to provide a saner default.

Well, why change the default?  Surely anyone who cares is altering it
at runtime anyway.  And if they are not, we should encourage them to do
so?