Messages in this thread | | | From | Der Herr Hofrat <> | Subject | Re: bug in kernel/sysctl.c (SYSIPC) ? | Date | Tue, 18 Mar 2003 19:55:36 +0100 (CET) |
| |
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:51:17 +0100 (CET) Der Herr Hofrat <der.herr@hofr.at> wrote: > > | atleast in kernel 2.4.19 and 2.4.20 in kernel/sysctl.c shmmax and shmall use > | the proc_dointvec_minmax callback without passing a min/max value - is there > | a reson for this or is this a simple bug ? > | > | linux/kenrel/sysctl.c (line 221 for 2.4.19/20) > | > | #ifdef CONFIG_SYSVIPC > | {KERN_SHMMAX, "shmmax", &shm_ctlmax, sizeof (size_t), > | 0644, NULL, &proc_doulongvec_minmax}, > | {KERN_SHMALL, "shmall", &shm_ctlall, sizeof (size_t), > | 0644, NULL, &proc_doulongvec_minmax}, > | ... > | #endif > > The min and max values default to 0 if not specified (initialized), > and the _minmax functions have code to handle those cases. > > so as long as the intended min/max values were 0, I don't see a > problem. Are you seeing a problem? >
not directly a problem - my assumption was that shmmax would be bounded in some way - currently you can write any value into /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax - and I don't think that the inteded behavior of this is to permit any value - or if it is - what is the point of using the _minimax and not simple proc_doulongvec ?
hofrat - 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/
| |