linux-kernel - Re: [Phishing Risk] Re: [Phishing Risk] Re: [Phishing Risk] [External] Re: [PATCH] cgroup/cpuset: Add a new isolated mems.policy type.

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <262052c8-c03c-24c4-9163-5df8e9f312be@bytedance.com>
Date:   Fri, 9 Sep 2022 11:00:57 +0800
From:   Zhongkun He <hezhongkun.hzk@...edance.com>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:     lizefan.x@...edance.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Phishing Risk] Re: [Phishing Risk] Re: [Phishing Risk]
 [External] Re: [PATCH] cgroup/cpuset: Add a new isolated mems.policy type.

Hi Tejun,
> Hello,
> 
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2022 at 08:06:30PM +0800, Zhongkun He wrote:
>> It would be better if one process had a way to dynamically modify the
>> mempolicy of another process. But unfortunately there is no interface or
>> system call to do that in userspace.
> 
> If you need to change the properties dynamically, I suggest adding this as a
> dynamic per-process interface first. That's more generic and useful for more
> cases.
> 
> Thanks.

Got it, thanks for your suggestion and reply.