netdev - Re: [PATCH net-net 0/4] Increase the limit of tuntap queues

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: <20141123.134323.1154795102254868842.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sun, 23 Nov 2014 13:43:23 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	mst@...hat.com
Cc:	pagupta@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, jasowang@...hat.com, dgibson@...hat.com,
	vfalico@...il.com, edumazet@...gle.com, vyasevic@...hat.com,
	hkchu@...gle.com, wuzhy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, xemul@...allels.com,
	therbert@...gle.com, bhutchings@...arflare.com, xii@...gle.com,
	stephen@...workplumber.org, jiri@...nulli.us,
	sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-net 0/4] Increase the limit of tuntap queues

From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2014 12:46:23 +0200

> At the moment attaching/detaching queues is an unpriveledged operation.
> 
> Shouldn't we worry that an application can cause large
> allocations, and provide a way to limit these?
> 
> David, could you comment on this please?

I don't want arbitrary limits imposed.

Where does this "application" run?  If it's in the host, then who
cares?  If they suck up all of their available memory with queue
resources, it's their problem.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html