lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Nov]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateTue, 26 Nov 2002 01:07:31 -0500 (EST)
FromPatrick Finnegan <>
SubjectRe: uml-patch-2.5.49-1
On 26 Nov 2002, Andi Kleen wrote:

> Jeff Dike <jdike@karaya.com> writes:
> > main points:
> > 	the kernel is in a separate process and address space from its processes
> > 	UML processes share a single host process
>
> Can you quickly describe why you didn't use one host process per uml
> process ?
>
> That would have avoided the need for a /proc/mm extension too I guess.

One reason I can think of is that it prevents 'stupid things' happening
under a copy of UML from killing the OS UML is running under... Eg. if a
process is running under UML because it's not trusted and then turns into
a forkbomb, you don't want that taking down the host OS.

Pat
--
Purdue Universtiy ITAP/RCS
Information Technology at Purdue
Research Computing and Storage
http://www-rcd.cc.purdue.edu


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:31    [from the cache]
©2003-2008