linux-kernel - Re: Re: [PATCH 2/3] kernel/pid: Remove default pid

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: <uu7pzw6cib324p6orccxonr5dqhgy5zdrjgpdqtt7yuf6b76o5@5nbw3mm64p7w>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 17:40:02 +0200
From: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, 
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, 
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>, 
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Tycho Andersen <tandersen@...flix.com>, 
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH 2/3] kernel/pid: Remove default pid_max value

Hello.

On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 01:29:55PM -0700, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> That seems like a large change.

In what sense is it large?

I tried to lookup the code parts that depend on this default and either
add the other patches or mention the impact (that part could be more
thorough) in the commit message.

> It isn't clear why we'd want to merge this patchset.  Does it improve
> anyone's life and if so, how?

- kernel devs who don't care about policy
  - policy should be decided by distros/users, not in kernel

- users who need many threads
  - current default is too low
  - this is one more place to look at when configuring

- users who want to prevent fork-bombs
  - current default is ineffective (too high), false feeling of safety
  - i.e. they should configure appropriate mechanism appropriately


I thought that the first point alone would be convincing and that only
scaling impact might need clarification.

Regards,
Michal